Using health insurance to pay for your yearly physical, eye
exam or dentist visit is like using car insurance to pay for gas and
tune-ups. Can you imagine the response you'd get from your State Farm
Insurance rep if you asked "Does this auto insurance plan cover my
gasoline and oil-changes too?"
Nobody on earth would even consider such a thing. The very idea is just
silly. But if you apply the same reasoning to health
insurance, you have to conclude that at some point, the American
consumer has come to equate health insurance with health care. I don't know anyone who would confuse their car insurance plan
for a car maintenance plan, but I know plenty of well-informed people
who no longer see that distinction when it comes to their personal
health expenditures.
Interesting, but so what?
I recently read through the Obama and McCain
issue statements on health care, hoping to see for myself what the
important differences are (and there are many). After reading a few
paragraphs into each, the following theme emerged: The emphasis of
both of their plans is to reduce the cost and increase the availability
of health insurance. Although the costs of health care are discussed, it is not the primary focus of either plan.
That is when it struck me: Americans do not want affordable health insurance. They want affordable health maintenance. People do not buy home or auto insurance to cover routine maintenance of their homes and cars. We buy those types of insurance to protect ourselves against rare catastrophic events. In terms of health, the desire is for the average family to be able to afford the routine costs of health maintenance. In a less insane world, these families would purchase health insurance like they did auto insurance - to protect themselves financially from infrequent catastrophic events.
Tying these two ideas together: It seems to me that driving force behind both candidates health care plans is the desire to make insurance more affordable. At the same time, it looks like we Americans are using health insurance for all the wrong reasons (regularly scheduled maintenance vs. only catastrophic events). In the end, all we really want is for the typical family to be able to afford the costs of basic health maintenance. Unfortunately, neither candidate seems to be addressing that fundamental issue. By casting the argument in terms of health insurance and not health maintenance, it only reinforces the confusion.
