A National Healthcare Network Can Work

The plan the Congress has available to it is the Federal Employees Health benefit Plan (FEHBP).

I just looked at the rates for next year and they run around $1,000 a month for families and about $400 for individual coverage. As a very rough rule of thumb, the Government pays about 2/3ds and the employee pays the rest, but that would not happen if the Government allowed other organizations or individuals into the plan. The fee for service plans are shown here:

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/09rates/nonpostal...

But let's look at the cost for say 100 million families at the current rates:

12,000 times 100 million comes to $1.2 trillion. And that's not a one-shot deal like the $700 billion bailout bill is. That's every year.

And the worst thing about this is that the $1.2 trillion would be chasing after very scarce medical resources. Prices would rise because the demand exceeds the supply.

A good portion of the $1.2 trillion would actually come from employers and employees who formerly bought insurance elsewhere so it isn't as terrible as it appears on the surface.

But it would allow individuals to become part of a large group, which means the costs get spread around. And the actual cost to the Federal Government (other than increases in premiums because of increases in medical costs) would be exactly zero, unless the Federal Government identified and agreed to pay for segments of the population which otherwise could not afford coverage.

For example: for the citizens on Medicare who could be covered into the system, we spend around $450 billion a year, which would presumably go towards that $1.2 trillion.

The most enticing thing about this plan is that it already exists. Upsizing it is merely a matter of adding enrollment and collecting the premiums for disbursement to the insurance providers (think Blue Cross, Blue Shield, Comprecare, organization plans such as that of the Mail Handlers (which allow non-postal people in if they pay a small annual dues). There are also health maintenance organizations (HMOs) in almost every state and in a great many urban areas that serve clients within a specified geographical area.

I would think that more of these would spring up to provide insurance for people elsewhere as the plan expanded. The competition would be extremely healthy, and I believe we'd get our best bang for our buck by going this way.

Note that this is not Government running an insurance plan, it's Government running an enrollment agency and collecting premiums. It is NOT Big Brother Government.

DanT

The rates you list for coverage on the FEHB are high. I am covered by the FEHB as a retiree. I pay a little over $300 monthly for the BC/BS High family plan. I believe the rates for family coverage range from around $200 to $400 monthly, and for single coverage from around $90 to $120 monthly, which are very affordable. With these plans, there are differences in co-payments and deductables, but you make your choice. There are mandates: they must cover everyone who enrolls, and many procedures are covered, such as regular physicals, mammograms, immunizations, etc. They also cover 75% of prescribed drugs, this may also be a mandate. However, I believe it is an excellent plan and should be extended to everyone. (I also believe that it should be funded by a consumption tax, which would be around 6 to 7 percent.)

DanT
I was suggesting a Value-Added Tax, like what is used in nearly every other industrial country, or a Canadian style Goods + Services Tax, and end the requirement that employers provide health insurance. The benefit with a VAT is that the tax is rebated on exports, and added to most imports. This would make American businesses more competitive, and provide jobs, and reduce the debt. I also see that the premium on my health insurance will go up by $42.xx next year. This is quite a jump.