I previously wrote in favor of using vouchers as a means of reforming the increasingly dysfunctional and economically threatened health care system in America. I feel that a federal voucher system could be fashioned in a way that meets both Republican and Democratic concerns. I.e., employer-provided health insurance would be abolished. Taxpayers (especially corporate taxpayers and rich taxpayers) would instead pay into a pool used to provide an annual voucher to every American, good for so many dollars worth of health care insurance each year (health care spending is presently around $8,000 per person). The annual voucher could be adjusted so that rich people get smaller vouchers and the poor and working class get bigger ones (i.e., worth more $$). This would allow insurers to compete in an open market for voucher customers. The federal government would regulate this competition so as to discourage “creaming”, i.e. trying to attract only young and healthy participants. The government would also require that every policy meets some minimum standard of benefits (e.g., it can’t be a bare-bones “big emergency only” policy).

I’m not the only one that believes that a voucher-based system is the best (although certainly far from a perfect) way to deal with the health care crisis. A recent article by economist Robert Samuelson mapped out the current economic and political dimensions of the crisis. Samuelson came to the same conclusion – vouchers are the best way to get a handle on this distressing situation.

I fully anticipate (along with Samuelson) that such a system would change the nature of health care  »  continue reading …