I just read an article on The Hill about a non-Democratic universal health care plan and it is not very impressive. I have suggested all along that this can be accomplished by considering the current sources of health care funds and channeling them through such a plan which only leaves those who have no insurance because insurance is so expensive. But the real problem with the current plan, in addition to the fact that we still have millions without healthcare is that by using insurance we add a heavy layer of bureaucracy that does nothing except deny health care.

The non-Democratic plan is essentially the same thing. Why do I call it the "non-Democratic" plan? Because the author is offering it as an alternative to the Democratic approach.

The plan is just a matter of allowing funds to be collected from three sources to pay for an individual's health care insurance and unreimbursed costs through Health Ownership Accounts (HOA). Yes, this is just a way to pay for the same insurance we all have now... or maybe not the same. Here are the three sources of funds.

1) You can contribute money tax-free. Wow! We would have the government's permission to pay for our own insurance. How nice. So this does nothing to provide "universal" health care since this is just an exiting option with a tax advantage added.

2) Our employers can contribute instead of actually providing group plans with negotiated rates. These contributions would be on an individual basis.. Again, nothing that helps with universal health care and actually this takes a step backwards since we lose the bargaining power a large company has.

3) For those who currently receive government assistance for health care, government funds can be directly provided to the accounts so insurance can be bought. Not at all the same as Medicaid.

I think this still leaves a fair population uninsured just as we have now. Lose your job as happened in the beginning of the pandemic and you lose your insurance. But you can always pay the insurance premiums yourself... if you have the money.

In reality it just adds a layer of crap in the path to getting insurance compared to what we have now which is already encumbered by having the insurance layer to begin with.

Why can't the US just look at the many, many countries that provide universal health care and pick the parts that work well from each and find a way to provide a good if not better solution? Why do we keep trying to fund a huge, inefficient and restrictive insurance industry? Are we afraid that phasing out insurance will cripple the economy by the efficiency it will promote?

This is not rocket science. It's medical science. Our system leaves millions of people without effective healthcare and millions of others with healthcare that can evaporate if they lose their jobs. It also drives up costs.. We can provide better care to more people for less dollars. Why won't we do it?

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209