While the health care reform recently passed by Congress does not contain “public option” (government-run health care plan), that does not mean it is without questionable provisions, most notably requiring all citizens to obtain health care — or face a fine — and outlawing the denial of coverage based on preexisting conditions by health insurance companies. Relevant comparisons to other forms of insurance, such as auto insurance, help to highlight the issues with these provisions.
The requirement for all citizens to obtain health insurance or face a fine is similar to auto insurance laws, which require drivers to have auto insurance or pay an uninsured motorist fee. However, the key difference between health insurance and auto insurance is that driving is a choice; therefore, choosing to drive comes with the reasonable obligation of obtaining insurance.
Health insurance, on the other hand, is no longer a choice. Your mere existence mandates that you have health insurance. It is now the first commodity that U.S. citizens are required by their government to purchase. The precedent set by this provision is frightening and the Supreme Court may be called upon to determine its constitutionality. There is also little doubt that this provision represents a restriction of individual choice and, by extension, freedom.
Outlawing the denial of coverage based on preexisting conditions by health insurance companies is similarly nonsensical. In this situation, it is important to understand the principles associated with insurance. Insurance premiums are based on risk. A young, healthy person is less likely to get sick than an older person who smokes and has high blood pressure. The younger person will pay a lower insurance premium.
This is analogous to auto insurance when young inexperienced drivers (or those with a poor accident history) pay more for insurance than an experienced driver with a stellar record.
The relevant health care situation is when people who do not have health insurance become sick. Currently, they would probably apply for insurance and either be accepted at elevated premiums or denied coverage because their risk is known to be high — it’s already known that they are sick and will need to draw benefits. This recently passed health care reform requires that these people now must be accepted by insurance companies at the same premiums as others, despite their much higher risk.
This mandate defies the entire logic upon which insurance is based. It would be like wrecking your car without insurance and then being given insurance at the same rate as your neighbor with a perfect driving record. The only possible results from this are higher premiums across the board, which is the opposite of what the reform is supposed to do, or private insurance companies going out of business.
These problematic provisions combined with a completely partisan process — not a single Republican voted for it in the House or Senate and 34 House Democrats voted against it — and 54 percent of the public opposed to it, lead me to question the entire process and the politicians who passed it into law. I hope you’ll take a look for yourself and express your opinion with your vote in November.
Matthew Hiser
Senior materials science and engineering major