* CHP, #6 of n

Topics: Health
01 Nov 1993

From: ervan

Today, in a speech, Hillary RC attacked the advertisement that
has been on TV showing a couple sitting at their kitchen table,
worrying out loud about the CHP. She labelled it a lie. What
were her reasons? Because the facts were wrong? No. Because
there was flawed analysis? No. Dubious assumptions? No.
Instead, her only 'reason' was pure ad hominem: it was produced
by insurance companies (which it says in the ad, in any case,
albeit in small type). By that standard, we should not trust
anything the government says because the people in it have an
interest in increasing their own power and not producing
results. Okay, actually we should not trust its *actions* for
that reason, but that does mean the reasoning offered by, for
instance, a senator on the floor is true or false because of
his position as a senator.

After some general smears, she said (and I quote exactly):
"They [the insurance companies] like being able to exclude. The
more they can exclude the more they can make. [...] They have
brought us to the brink of bankruptcy because of the way they
have financed health care."

The 'brink of bankruptcy'? Somebody advocating more spending
for a government $4T+ in debt is worried about the insurance
companies bringing us to the brink of bankruptcy! Well, in
any case, it's simply false. As I previously noted insurance
companies take at most 10% and people are free to self
insure. While 10% might be excessive, it's not a make or
break amount.

The nominal reason for what's wrong with insurance companies
(which has nothing to do with the accuracy of their
advertisement but merely tries to slader them as capitalists
before dismissing their argument arbitrarily) is "they like
being able to exclude". That's absolutely false. It's another
instance of how government created the problem then blames free
enterprise(*). Specifically, insurance companies are perfectly
happy to sell insurance to everyone, at whatever price is fair,
given their circumstances. Government (mostly state in this
case) specifically prohibits insurance companies from charging
different rates for a variety of circumstances. Well, the
natural reaction, if the only premium you can charge is the one
appropriate for the healthiest of people, is to insure only the
healthiest of people. And this is an insurance industry
failure according to HRC!

"The more they can exlude" is perfectly ludicrous too. Yes,
those evil capitalist insurance companies would like to exclude
everyone and then they would be rich when there are no
customers left! Of course, HRC is going to apply more of the
same crippling recipe and level all rates regardless of risk or
circumstance. This is supposed to be fair because it widens
the risk pool. It does finish removing what little incentive

And remember, HRC told us that the insurance companies are the
liers. Well, I guess she is an expert.

(*) I think I mentioned this previously but my other favorite
instance of this in the health care debate is Clinton blaming
insurance companies for not having portable policies when it is
the government which encouraged people by tax subsidies and
wage freezes to have non-portable employer based insurance
instead of portable personal health insurance. So, the
government creates the problem, blames free enterprise, then
proceeds with more of its 'solutions'. Will those evil
capitalists be blamed for rationing if CHP goes into place?