“We shouldn’t have to leave our country to have a reasonable health care system,” says Eric O’Keefe, chair of the Health Care Compact Alliance.
I agree, but what to do with Obamacare, at present secure from repeal?
O’Keefe points out that Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution permits states to enter into compacts with one another provided they get congressional approval. States have done so since colonial times; there are currently 200 state compacts in force dealing with issues from driver’s licensing to wildlife.
The Health Care Compact would allow states to “get rid of all of Obamacare,” and to tell the federal government, as O’Keefe puts it, “You keep your regulations; send us back our money.”
“It’s not just a way to block Obamacare,” O’Keefe explains. “It includes Medicare and Medicaid, creates a block grant of all the money and it goes into the compacting states for them to manage as they see fit. So the citizens and the legislature will work it out in their state.”
States that join the compact could set up their own health care system with the money they currently receive from the federal government, sans regulations and mandates. While some states might experiment with single-payer systems, others could expand medical savings accounts and other market-oriented reforms.
Georgia, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas have already passed the Health Care Compact, and will likely apply for congressional approval once a dozen or more states join.
Who’s next?
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
3 replies on “A Compact Solution”
I had no idea you were so young that you missed out on the Marshall Plan. You also missed out on the AMA’s objections to health insurance. Fee for service was the hue and cry. Governor Warren of California tried for a medical plan but the AMA shot him down with the same rhetoric we hear today, e.g., death squads, government clinics you had to go to for medical care. Same old, same old. The real reason, of course, is any medical plan hits the insurance companies, not the M.D.s
Bruce — What do you think of this idea to let states try different approaches?
Taking money forcibly from some only to give it to others (for their health care in this case) is simply immoral. If you did this, you’d be jailed for theft. That government does it “for us” doesn’t make it moral. This means that Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and government welfare in general is just immoral and should be opposed on those grounds.
Those who say letting people die is immoral, can contribute their own money for the cause if that’s what they believe. That is freedom.