Say No To Universal Coverage | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Say No To Universal Coverage
by
If you think the entire premise of “universal healthcare” is ill conceived and leads to bad results take a look here and here.(h/t RedState) As National Review pointed out some time back when urging rejection of universal coverage as a goal: “Deregulating health insurance would make it more affordable, and thus increase the number of Americans with coverage. But to achieve universal coverage would require either having the government provide it to everyone or forcing everyone to buy it. The first option, national health insurance in some form or other, would either bust the budget or cripple medical innovation, and possibly have both effects. Mandatory health insurance, meanwhile, would entail a governmental definition of a minimum package of benefits that insurance has to cover. Over time, that minimum package would grow more and more expensive as provider groups lobbied the government to include their services in the mandate.” It seems the Massachusetts experience — the best real life example of the folly of universal coverage — has proved this empirically true. Rather than ask about New Year’s resolutions at the next debate perhaps we could ask which of the candidates share these sentiments–might be something voters would want to consider in evaluating the candidates. (And a simple show of hands would NOT suffice.)
Sign Up to receive Our Latest Updates! Register

Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!