Politics are intertwined with everything in our society these days, and health care is not spared from this trend. In recent years, political leaders have placed an increasing emphasis on the future of the American health care system.
The cost of healthcare has been a primary focus of leaders in both parties. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), total national health expenditures have risen from $1.369 trillion (13.4% of GDP) in 2000 to $3.492 trillion (17.9% of GDP) in 2017. This is a more than a 150% increase in almost 20 years, and spending has almost certainly continued to increase since 2017.
Political leaders have also focused on the number of Americans who are not currently insured. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 27.5 million Americans were without insurance coverage during 2018 (the most recent data available), but that number has most likely increased, as well. These are startling numbers and do not show a promising picture for the future of the American healthcare system. Leaders must do something to reverse current trends. However, more government intervention in the healthcare sector is not the answer.
The problem with more government intervention goes back to the affordability problem. Under President Obama, Democratic leadership passed one of the most extensive overhauls of the American healthcare system in the Patient Protection and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). This massive piece of legislation added several regulations on health care providers, which forced them to raise the prices on their plans and/or cut the amount of coverage their plans offered.
Whenever the government mandates something on the private sector, companies pass along their increased costs to the consumers. Increased government regulation will only increase the price of insurance plans, making them more unaffordable to more Americans. Additionally, government mandates and regulations on the health care sector significantly restrict competition within the marketplace. This allows companies to be less competitive in their pricing while charging more for healthcare.
To fix this problem, some proponents of government intervention have called for the government to cover the cost of healthcare for a greater number of Americans. These solutions range from a “public option” to single-payer health care. However, the federal government already spends $1.1 trillion on healthcare under the current system. With a budget deficit already in the trillions and a national debt over $20 trillion, a substantial increase in spending on health care by the government is not sustainable without a significant increase in taxes. So while some Americans might spend less in direct health care costs, they will have to pay more to the government out of their paychecks. Affordability remains a problem under these plans.
The government is full of inefficiencies and is not adequately suited to manage massive industries, such as the health care sector. The private sector should lead the efforts to reduce health care costs and increase coverage. Instead of mandating what must be covered in a plan, government leaders should allow consumers to pick according to their needs. Consumer freedom would prevent unneeded coverage (and costs) from being included. Further, insurance companies should be able to sell across state lines. This would create a national marketplace and reduce the ability for monopolies to be created. Finally, large groups, such as AARP, the NRA and the Chamber of Commerce, should be allowed to offer their members a health care plan as part of their membership benefits.
These are just some of the many proposals which would solve major problems within the health care market without involving massive government intervention. If Americans truly want to both decrease costs and increase the availability of healthcare, they must turn away from the government and turn to the free market for quality solutions.
