Politicians like to offer something for nothing and unfortunately the new healthcare bill will cost something. Count on politicians to invoke the right of healthcare while being reluctant to pay for it.
If there is one thing in the proposed health care overhaul that sets Michael Cannon's libertarian teeth on edge, it's the requirement that all Americans must get health insurance.
But even as critics on the right talk of legal challenges, critics on the left complain that Americans will be locked into buying a product that threatens to become ever more expensive -- especially if, as seems likely, the final bill does not contain a "public option," a government-run insurance program.
Critics on both the right and the left can point to polls that show the mandate is unpopular. But even as the provision is assailed, there are others -- such as the insurance industry -- who are unhappy for a different reason. Insurers worry that the sanctions in the bills for failing to comply with the mandate are too mild, which could result in young, healthy people choosing to pay a relatively small tax penalty rather than buy insurance.
But defenders of the legislation say that fears of an ineffective mandate are overblown. (in Massachusetts the mandate is a success) The state enacted its own insurance mandate in 2006. About 96 percent of residents were insured by the end of 2008 -- although the state's penalties for violating its mandate are higher than those in the Senate's bill.
Health care overhaul: Critics on left, right unite against mandate
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
