Beware of care rationing

When Sarah Palin said that the emerging health care reform legislation would lead to "death panels" and government rationing of care, her language was explosive, but her premise about rationing was not.

The most critical test of any reform proposal is whether it will empower individuals or impose on them. It is a fact that the leading bills in Congress would increase the power of government and decrease individual freedom. You cannot spend an additional $1 trillion of taxpayer money and reduce the role of government. You will get new bureaucracies, more regulation, more complexity. That means you will have less control of your health care.

Disagree? Just read the versions of health care legislation in the House. One key proposal is to mandate an "essential benefit package" for every private insurance policy sold in the United States. Currently, individuals and employers usually make these coverage decisions. This legislation creates a new federal Health Benefits Advisory Committee that would decide instead.

Other planned agencies would give the federal government unprecedented and unaccountable control over your health care. The so-called Health Choices Administration and the National Health Insurance Exchange would set various standards for all health insurance policies. The president is also pushing for another new agency called the Independent Medicare Advisory Council. Described as a cost-control initiative, it would be made up of five government appointees who would, by determining Medicare reimbursement amounts, in essence decide what would be covered and what would not.

The fear of government rationing is based on the premise that once government has such power, especially the ability to control what is covered by your private insurance policy, it also has the power to deny and restrict. The unprecedented power this legislation would grant to virtually unaccountable government agencies is all but certain to lead to rationing.

To be clear, the health care system is in need of reform, particularly health insurance. But the answer is not central planning. The answer is more market competition - giving consumers more choices, more information and more control.

Here is one example. There are more than 1,300 health insurance companies in this country, but currently, consumers can buy only a product licensed in each individual state. Creating a nationwide health insurance market where any individual or group can shop for less expensive coverage from another state would provide more choices, forcing private plans to create better products, improve services and lower prices.

Tax credits are one way to help consumers purchase private coverage, or we could allow individuals to deduct the cost of insurance they purchase, just as employers do now.

There is no doubt that we badly need to improve our health care system. But reform must empower individuals, not government.