Good free-market approach would improve health care

Published: Sunday, July 12, 2009 12:02 a.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 

New Jersey, for example, requires insurers to cover a wide range of procedures and types of care, including in-vitro fertilization, contraceptives, chiropodists and coverage of children until they reach age 25. Those mandated benefits aren't cheap. According to a 2007 analysis by the National Center for Policy Analysis, the cost of a standard health insurance policy for a healthy 25-year-old man averaged $5,580 in the state. A standard policy in Kentucky, which has far fewer mandates, would cost the same man only $960 a year.

Unfortunately, consumers are more or less held prisoner by their state's regulatory regime. It is illegal for that hypothetical New Jersey resident to buy the cheaper health insurance in Kentucky. On the other hand, if consumers were free to purchase insurance in other states, they could in effect "purchase" the regulations of that other state. A consumer in New Jersey could avoid the state's regulatory costs and choose, say, Kentucky, if that state's regulations aligned more closely with his or her preferences.

With millions of American consumers balancing costs and risks, states would be forced to evaluate whether their regulations offered true value or simply reflected the influence of special interests. Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz., has a bill in Congress that would allow consumers to purchase their insurance in other states.

We also need to rethink medical licensing laws to encourage greater competition among providers. Nurse practitioners, physician assistants, midwives and other non-physician practitioners should have far greater ability to treat patients. We also should be encouraging such innovations in delivery as medical clinics in retail outlets.

Story continues below

The choice facing us now is not between Obama's plan for health care micromanaged by the government or doing nothing. Rather, it is a choice between government control, regulation and rationing on one hand, and free markets, choice and competition on the other.

That is the real health-care debate.

Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and co-author of "Healthy Competition: What's Holding Back Health Care and How to Free It."

Recent comments

To Step Plan | 1:31 p.m.

Your post sounds a little like the...

Ultra Bob  | July 12, 2009 at 8:02 p.m.

One of the greatest principals of the American experiment is the...

Ultra Bob  | July 12, 2009 at 6:56 p.m.

Tanner provides excellent solutions, that, unlike more government...

Simple Utah Mormon Politics | July 12, 2009 at 5:33 p.m.

Image
Michelle Christensen, Deseret News

previousnext

Latest comments

Jason, you obviously don't understand ethics very well. When a senator is...

Mathews helps play some defense

...MENTAL TOUGHNESS? Look at and listen to Wesley Matthews. This is what...

the author needs to research Pres. Grant's history more thoroughly, the...

Congrats.....very good first year and looks promising for next. Takes time...

"Some men want to marry their sisters. Some men want to marry other men. As...

Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing

Why attack Glenn Beck, it doesn't make any sense. Why do it unless you have...

Snow hopes to snap bowl game skid

Snow wins 41-37!!!!!!!! Go Badgers!

To: re: MoJules | 9:43 a.m. Dec. 3, 2009 I'm not even going to TRY to...

Will Harpring be missed?

I'll miss Harpring, he was a true BB player with heart and soul. He was a...

Jazz outrun Pacers

Jazz fans were booing the Pacers and the officials. That hurt their feelings...

Advertisements