President Trump promised to replace Obamacare, but so far has
only suggested modifying it. He should replace the Obama
approach to health care.
Medical costs cause the price of health insurance to be too high for
some to afford. Obamacare attempted to deal with high
insurance rates by forcing healthy people to buy health
insurance.
A better approach would recognize that it isn't practical for
profit-making insurance programs to pay for expensive to treat
chronic disorders such as those associated with alcohol or tobacco
use. Special programs could be set up to cover such
disorders.
Taxes on alcohol and tobacco should be used to fund programs for
alcohol and tobacco related medical disorders. For
example, a per gallon tax on alcohol products would go into a fund
for treatment of alcohol related disorders. A doctor
would certify that a person has an alcohol related disorder and
health care providers would send health care bills for the patient
to the alcohol fund in the same way bills are sent to insurance
companies for payment. To simplify payment procedures
all medical problems of a patient with an alcohol related medical
problem would be paid by the fund because alcohol can reduce the
body's ability to handle problems. The fund would also cover
medical costs of those who suffer injuries because of the
actions of someone under the influence of alcohol even if the injury
involved a preexisting condition. A police report that one of
the drivers in a traffic accident was under the influence of alcohol
would trigger payment from the alcohol fund even if the courts
wouldn't consider the drinking driver to be at fault.
Under the current insurance system people who never use tobacco or
alcohol help pay for the medical treatment of those who have tobacco
or alcohol related medical problems. Under my proposal only
those who use alcohol and tobacco products would pay to
treat medical problems related to alcohol and tobacco
use.
Another type of health care fund would involve specific disorders,
such as heart trouble or specific cancers that may be caused by
various factors other than tobacco or alcohol.
Government would use general taxes to finance treatment and conduct
research. Other funds might come from non-profit
organizations. Government might encourage non-profit funds by
offering to match what they raise.
Each fund would operate in part as a research project. Paying
for all treatments from a single fund would allow researchers to
monitor and compare the success rate of various different
treatments. Insurance companies are reluctant to fund
experimental treatments because they can't expect to benefit from
them, but the federal government could benefit from knowing what
doesn't work as well as knowing what does work.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment