An editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal argues that rather than reducing costs, the 2006 universal health care reform in Massachusetts has led to run-away public spending and an over reliance on the publicly-subsidized health care option. The Journal complains that “the ‘connector’ that was supposed to link individuals to private insurance options has barely been used” and proposes that “the real problem in health care is the way the tax code and third-party payment system distort incentives“:
That’s where John McCain has been focusing his reform efforts – because that really does have the potential to reduce costs while covering more of the uninsured – and Republicans ought to follow his lead.
Ironically McCain’s efforts to reform the tax code, create — rather than eliminate– a “real problem.” His plan increases costs across the board because it eliminates the tax incentives for employer-based insurance programs and pushes individuals out of diversified employer-based health pools and into the individual insurance market.
McCain replaces the employer health tax credit with a one-size fits all tax credit of $5,000 per family ($2,500 tax credit for individuals) for the first year. And while this credit may assist a limited number of families who currently lack any kind of health insurance, workers who receive a higher tax subsidy through employer-based plans would experience a tax increase; Americans with pre-existing medical conditions would either be locked-out of the system by the prohibitive costs of insurance in the individual market or fail to find insurance that covers their conditions.
Insurance costs would increase for the individual consumer and the insurance company. While insurance firms would have to spend more money “marketing and processing individual plans,” the individual consumer would have to stretch McCain’s tax credit to cover the ever-growing costs of medical premiums. This is because McCain indexes the growth of his initial $5,000 offering to inflation, not premiums. And, since premiums grow at a higher rate than inflation, McCain’s proposal imposes $3.6 trillion tax increase on the consumer.
Far from “reducing costs” and “covering more of the uninsured,” McCain’s Bush-like health care proposal increases personal health care costs and administrative costs and leaves more people un-insured and underinsured.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

Whenever I think of the free market system used to control industries of necessity I am brought back to the definition and established goals of any corporation. Legally, corporations are accountable to their stakeholders, NOT their to their clients in need. Because of this the goal of any company is simply to increase profit margins. With health care this translates into reduced coverage and minimum payouts. Free market conditions for insurance companies neither makes theoretical sense nor practical sense. I cannot see this plan opening up a better, cheaper health care system- instead I see it leading towards a systems of policies with exclusions and many limitations coupled with reduced payouts by insurance companies. My fears lie in the health care industry mirroring the property insurance industry. Today we are seeing huge profits in this sector coupled with reduced coverage and claim payments and the refusal for coverage of entire regions- ie. Southeast Louisiana.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:38 amone question of clarification-
In McCain’s proposal is he asking for the companies to take the money they were other wise spending on health care for their employees and use it to increase pay? ie. if a company was paying 5,000 a year per employee, wages would increase 5,000 a year. I read one report detailing it this way and was unsure of the accuracy.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:39 am