As with so many of our societal problems, the excessive cost of healthcare is a direct result of the government having gotten involved in the industry during the LBJ administration. Any reform, therefore, must start with the government withdrawing from the industry. Not overnight...but over time.
Government intervention inevitably causes distortions in the free market; indeed, that is why the government feels compelled in to intervene -- to create distortions, usually because of somebody's perceived "unfairness".
In general, that would be the best solution to the problem -- gradually withdraw the government from the equation, returning the industry to the sole control of healthcare providers, insurance companies...and the market. Plus, restricting regulatory functions to the several states.
That doesn't address your particular problem, however. And, while I don't share your experience, I'm sensitive to it.
The problem is we can't expect insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions unless they charge an appropriate premium. That's what they have actuaries for, after all. More often than not, though, the "appropriate premium" is simply unaffordable. Nor can we expect the company's other insured to pick up the freight for somebody else's pre-existing condition. Doing so would make the company uncompetitive.
Some states, I'm aware, have established so-called "high risk" pools for health insurance (as well as auto insurance). I understand these pools are a.) subsidized (thus involving taxpayer money) and b.) require the insurance companies doing business in the state to share the costs more-or-less equally.
This solves the problem of availability and competitive balance, while spreading the incremental cost as broadly as it can perhaps be spread. Even at that, though, I understand this pooled coverage remains relatively expensive (as it no doubt must be) and is only rarely purchased (another commment up-thread remarked that only 90,000 such "pool" policies were in force in the entire state of Texas).
Making policies portable from state-to-state is an easy fix in many circumstances.
But children with a pre-existing condition growing into their majority and unable to get coverage is a problem that must be addressed in some fashion. I'm certainly up to letting the states address this rather than the feds.
I'll cut no slack for one group of people with pre-existing conditions: The people who had access to coverage and the resources to purchase it, who chose not to. That's called being irresponsible. And I wouldn't be surprised if the vast bulk of people complaining about this problem aren't in this particular group (e.g., Bob Beckel). Any program I might author would leave these people on their own.
At any rate, any move toward lower healthcare costs for all must begin with shoving the federal government out of the way.
Don't know whether I've helped you clarify your thoughts. But your post certainly helped me clarify mine...
And this is what we need. Not just in medicine, but in many areas.
We need to field the public for very good ideas and implement them.
My husband is a soldier and he sees MANY areas where we could cut military spending without cutting pay, military resources or readiness.
But the way that the system works, it rewards failure.
Let me give you one very small thing that’s been bugging me for years about TriCare.
My daughter’s doctor said that she needed to see a cardiologist. The cardiologist ran a bunch of tests, said that this was wrong and that she needed a neurologist.
The cardiologist can’t send her to a neurologist. He sends his report to my dr’s PM (suggesting the referral to the neuro), then my daughter has to make another appointment to see her PM who then gives her a new and separate referral to a neurologist.
The inability of one specialist to refer to another is stupid as hell.
So TriCare now has to pay for a NEW appt with her PM to get a new referral to the new specialist.
Now we not only add the cost of the appointment to the PM that wasn’t necessary, we add the paperwork with TriCare.
I know it seems small - $75 for an appt, half an hour of a TriCare employee to process this appt - but do this a thousand times... ten thousand times... twenty thousand times a year...
How much is this extra step costing taxpayers?
When you factor in that this stupid rule applies to every soldier, sailor, airman, marine, retiree and military dependent, it adds up.
Where can I go to suggest this small change that would probably save the military healthcare system a billion dollars each year? I’ve written a letter to TriCare. I’ve written op-eds. I’ve blogged about it.
Nobody listens. Nobody cares.
THAT is the problem with gov’t programs. Once the system is in place, nobody is motivated to change it.
Trust me, if a private insurance company found a way to cut a ton of money from their budget AND make their customers happier, they’d do it.
In 2005 the Texas High Risk Insurance Pool commissioned a study to figure out why nobody was using the program. The study found many issues with the program and multiple suggestions to fix it. The Texas legislature ignored the study.
I love the idea of an ‘x-prize’. There are many, MANY people out there smarter than me. But it’s worthless if there’s nobody to implement these ideas.
This is why we keep putting our hopes in politicians. In our minds, that’s what they’re hired to do. But *their* motivation is to get elected.