Trumpcare has failed. Although a serious subject, I can't help but stifle a small laugh because the promises to repeal Obamacare were always fraudulent lies simply to get votes.
Healthcare systems don't completely play by the free market rules of supply and demand, and there's no precedent for what would happen if you decided overnight to completely remove regulation and government from the healthcare system. It's too important and too big to decide to 100% change it overnight.
That's why a gradual phase-in of changes with numerous choices along with true competition is worth look. And to get that, you've got to look at Federalism. The states should be allowed to experiment thus allowing true innovation and "right-sizing" to take place.
Personally, I'm a huge fan of health-savings accounts that can grow tax free backed up by a high-deductible or catastrophic policy. Premiums should be based not only on age and health, but also how much someone is saving and other factors. And government can't be eliminated completely just yet. You are still going to have to have some kind of subsidy system.
We are never going to be able to move from one form to another with gradual changes and experimentation. If anyone says they have the answer to our healthcare system issues in one bill, idea, or plan then run and hide. No one does. But, perhaps, we can slowly get to a better system by trial-and-error and without causing people to have less coverage, lose coverage, or get frozen out completely.
I had only briefly heard about this plan previously, but I think it sounds like a good starting point.
Repeal and Compete:
https://nyti.ms/2krVE3q
Long and the short of it is what I was referencing earlier. Let's states experiment and make decisions that are best for their population and area. You would absolutely have to have some very basic minimum requirements for plans/covariance, but as the article references people could opt out.
But, if New York decided they wanted to try single-payer they could do it. If Texas decided they wanted everyone to have high-deductible plans with HSAs then great. Sure, you'd have to establish rules about residency and other factors to make sure abuse didn't happen, but that's the beauty of a slow and gradual transition along with multiple options and competition.
Don't get me wrong. This isn't a panacea, and the ideas I'm talking about could be completely wrong or blow-up catastrophically. But, by nature some states are less risk averse than other, and some will be very aggressive. Some will maintain the status quo. Ultimately, however, no one single idea will be able to sink us all, we can see what works and what doesn't, what we like and don't like, and actually vote about it and see our vote matter again.
This is not to say that such an idea is without risk, but we've got to broaden our options to consider more than just single-payer or an immediately deregulated freeforall. After all, didn't such state level collaboration and experimentation lead to give greatest country on earth?
