Many political candidates have been showcasing their attempts at "taking on" or "standing up to" HMOs, as an indication of how thoroughly they are looking after our best interests. Many candidates, including large segments of the former group, are bemoaning the large numbers of uninsured. It is time somebody stood up to these feel-good politicians, and told them the best thing they can do for both problems is the libertarian solution, to get government out of the way.
A Heritage Foundation study (What States Can Teach Congress About Health Care Regulation, by Melinda L. Schriver and Grace-Marie Arnett) has recently reported the results of a survey, by state, of the results of recent health care "reforms." It observed that 16 states were most aggressive in passing laws attempting to increase access to health insurance for their uninsured citizens. The data show that in 1996, after the legislation in all 16 states had been implemented, these states experienced an average annual growth in their uninsured population eight times that of the other 34 states. In those 16 states, there were more uninsured, fewer citizens covered by private insurance, and fewer citizens covered by individual insurance.
In every other industry, Americans recognize that regulation drives up prices, restricts innovation, dries up competition, and forces businesses to respond to regulators and not consumers. That is exactly what is happening in the health sector.
The Heritage Foundation study shows a number of things that states can do, but they have to follow policies that allow individuals to purchase health insurance that they own and control themselves in a free, competitive, and well-informed marketplace. And legislators, like good physicians, should take care to "First, do no harm."