Existing laws are forcing the increased problems with health care.
I'm sure there are multiple flaws with my solution below and invite criticism of it:
1. Group insurance drives down the cost of insurance to the individual who is a member of the group. The larger the group, the better the savings. Insurance companies may provide coverage only to employee groups, such as Sears, Target, Unions, Government workers, etc. They may not "create" groups. I suggest lifting restrictions on insurance companies so they may create new groups, such as the self-employed, employed without benefits, etc. In exchange for allowing these new groups, the insurance industry must then make available on a sliding scale similar to that used in Rapid City Community Health, insurance for the permanently disabled, the unemployable, the profoundly poor and those working but below the poverty level.
2. Tort reform to prevent frivolous lawsuits and outrageous judgments, to reduce premiums.
3. Allow oversight of the insurance industry to the individual states' insurance commissions, with federal guidelines for penalizing insurance companies who do not promptly pay covered costs.
4. If you are employed and your employer provides health insurance, you do not qualify.
5. Create federal regulations for portability and pre-existing condition coverage.
I'm sure the insurance and legal Forumpians can poke a bunch of holes in this solution. But, it provides a free market solution and keeps the government out of the insurance business, while allowing competitive choices for those currently not covered, while providing a new market niche for insurance companies, who for the price of covering the truly needy, will see additional profits for their profit hungry companies. The tort reform would eliminate the excuse that large judgments are driving premiums up.
Okay, Frankenfeld et al what's wrong with this solution?