Utopian promises, people shouting, and never-ending analysis on healthcare has probably made you think twice before turning on CNN or picking up a newspaper. If you are tuning in to the great debate that has descended on our country, chances are you are as confused as when you were trying to put together that “easy to assemble” piece of furniture from Wal-Mart. It never ceases to amaze me how Washington, lobbyists, and our faithful public servants turn an important issue into a complete circus act. Despite the circus atmosphere, it is important that you, your neighbors, and I understand what is being proposed.
Before I begin with my opinion on what is happening, let me be clear on one thing: I do not believe nor do I claim to have “the answer” to solving our country’s healthcare woes. Instead, I want to provide you with an insurance agent’s perspective on what is currently happening with the healthcare debate. Please remember that the following is merely my humble opinion.
Sunshine and lollipops are not coming our way: There has been a lot of talk about low-cost, benefit-rich health plans that will be available to everyone and how rising healthcare costs will be solved by using electronic medical records. I’m skeptical about how true these predictions are. Unfortunately, someone has to pay for healthcare. Insurance companies and the Federal Government do not have money trees in the backyard (the government can only print so much money out of thin air before inflation and other economic problems arise). Insurance companies and the Federal Government get money from you and me, so we either have to pay for healthcare through our own pocket, health insurance premiums, or taxes. If you are financially stable, you’re going to be paying for those less fortunate’s healthcare one way or another. This is part of the reason why an aspirin at the emergency room costs $25.00; you’re paying for your aspirin and all of the people who cannot afford to pay’s aspirin.
While electronic health records may reduce certain administrative costs, you’re still going to have to pay a doctor to remove your appendix. Not too mention you have to pay for all those nurses and high-tech medical equipment.
A big, complicated piece of legislation is not the most efficient way to solve our problems: I think many people have forgotten that snappy Schoolhouse Rock episode where the bill sings and dances about how a bill becomes a law. Big bills allow individuals in Congress to tack on questionable amendments to bills that are not often in the public’s best interest. These amendments are easier to hide in a big bill especially when the members of Congress haven’t even read the entire bill word for word. I advocate for a series of smaller bills to be passed to address certain key issues that represent part of the whole problem. Smaller bills passed over time would give Congress more flexibility should adjustments be needed as a result of unintended consequences caused by the new legislation. Smaller bills would also make it easier for our representatives in Washington as well as the public at large to read the full bill text before its passed into law.
Key items that need to be addressed: One item I believe Congress and I would agree on is the need to eliminate insurance company’s ability to decline health insurance coverage. The current system allows some people to be locked out from getting coverage due to their past medical history.
Post-issuance underwriting needs to be banned. Currently, many states allow health insurance companies to go back and re-underwrite a person who was previously approved for coverage when they file a claim.
Tort reform needs to be discussed. Even if we don’t want to admit it, our lawsuit-happy culture is adding to the cost of healthcare for everyone. This is an important issue that cannot be left on the side of the road because it makes some people politically uncomfortable.
Michael J. Lloyd
Brockhaus, Stuber, Fox & Lloyd, Inc. Insurance Agents
http://bsflinsurance.com/