Ten Easy Reforms to Cover Preexisting Conditions

By John C. Goodman

Most current proposals for dealing with the problems of preexisting conditions would completely divorce health insurance premiums from expected health care costs. Yet a policy of trying to force health plans to take enrollees they do not want risks jeopardizing the quality of care people receive.

Instead of suppressing the price system, there are 10 ways that make greater use of the price mechanism. In a reformed health care system, the chronically ill, along with their doctors, their employers and their insurers, should all find lower-cost, higher-quality, more-accessible care to be in their economic self-interest.

Encourage portable insurance. In almost every state, employers are not allowed to buy the kind of insurance most employees want and need: insurance they own and can take with them from job to job, in and out of the labor market. Most of the time, the problem of preexisting conditions arises precisely because health insurance isn’t portable. 

Allow special Health Savings Accounts for the chronically ill. Cash and Counseling pilot programs in Medicaid are under way in more than half the states. Homebound, disabled patients manage their own budgets, hiring and firing those who provide them with services. Satisfaction rates approach 100 percent (virtually unheard of in any health plan anywhere in the world). This program could become a model for treatment of chronic illness everywhere. 

Allow special-needs health insurance. Instead of requiring insurers to be all things to all people, allow plans to specialize in treating one or more chronic conditions. Plans could specialize, for example, in diabetic care, heart care, or cancer care, and they should be able to charge a market price (say, to employers, other insurer, and even risk pools), and price and quality competition should be encouraged. 

Allow health status insurance. To facilitate the market for chronic illness insurance, encourage a division of conventional insurance into two separate kinds of insurance, with two separate premiums. Standard insurance would cover the health needs of people during the insurance period, while health status insurance would pay future premium increases people face if they have a change in health status and try to switch to another health plan. 

Allow self-insurance for changes in health status. Federal tax law allows employers to pay for current-period medical expenses with untaxed dollars. But there is no similar opportunity for either employers or employees to save for a future change in health status that generates substantial increases in medical costs. Clearly, people need the ability to engage in contingency savings: a Health Savings Account for future, rather than current, medical costs. 

Give individuals the same tax break employees get. Most people who have a problem with preexisting conditions are trying to buy insurance in the individual market. Unless they are self-employed, they get virtually no tax relief, and even the self-employed are penalized vis-à-vis employer-provided insurance. All insurance should get the same tax relief regardless of where it is obtained, and individuals should get the same tax relief regardless of how they obtain their insurance. 

Allow providers to repackage and reprice their services under Medicare and Medicaid. Most providers today are trapped in a payment system that encourages high-cost, low-quality care. Encourage innovative solutions to the care of diabetes, asthma, cancer, heart disease, etc. Providers should be able to offer a different bundle of services and be paid in a different way as long as they reduce the government’s overall cost and provide a higher quality of care. 

John C. Goodman, Ph.D., is president and CEO of the National Center for Policy Analysis and a Senior Fellow for the Georgia Public Policy Foundation, an independent think tank that proposes practical, market-oriented approaches to public policy to improve the lives of Georgians. This commentary is excerpted from the April 2010 edition of the Heartland Institute’s Health Reform News and can be found at www.heartland.org/healthpolicy-news.org/article/27089/Ten_Easy_Reforms_to_Cover_Preexisting_Conditions.html. Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Georgia Public Policy Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before the U.S. Congress or the Georgia Legislature.

© Georgia Public Policy Foundation (February 26, 2010). Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided the author and his affiliations are cited.

By John C. Goodman

Most current proposals for dealing with the problems of preexisting conditions would completely divorce health insurance premiums from expected health care costs. Yet a policy of trying to force health plans to take enrollees they do not want risks jeopardizing the quality of care people receive.

Instead of suppressing the price system, there are 10 ways that make greater use of the price mechanism. In a reformed health care system, the chronically ill, along with their doctors, their employers and their insurers, should all find lower-cost, higher-quality, more-accessible care to be in their economic self-interest.

Encourage portable insurance. In almost every state, employers are not allowed to buy the kind of insurance most employees want and need: insurance they own and can take with them from job to job, in and out of the labor market. Most of the time, the problem of preexisting conditions arises precisely because health insurance isn’t portable. 

Allow special Health Savings Accounts for the chronically ill. Cash and Counseling pilot programs in Medicaid are under way in more than half the states. Homebound, disabled patients manage their own budgets, hiring and firing those who provide them with services. Satisfaction rates approach 100 percent (virtually unheard of in any health plan anywhere in the world). This program could become a model for treatment of chronic illness everywhere. 

Allow special-needs health insurance. Instead of requiring insurers to be all things to all people, allow plans to specialize in treating one or more chronic conditions. Plans could specialize, for example, in diabetic care, heart care, or cancer care, and they should be able to charge a market price (say, to employers, other insurer, and even risk pools), and price and quality competition should be encouraged. 

Allow health status insurance. To facilitate the market for chronic illness insurance, encourage a division of conventional insurance into two separate kinds of insurance, with two separate premiums. Standard insurance would cover the health needs of people during the insurance period, while health status insurance would pay future premium increases people face if they have a change in health status and try to switch to another health plan. 

Allow self-insurance for changes in health status. Federal tax law allows employers to pay for current-period medical expenses with untaxed dollars. But there is no similar opportunity for either employers or employees to save for a future change in health status that generates substantial increases in medical costs. Clearly, people need the ability to engage in contingency savings: a Health Savings Account for future, rather than current, medical costs. 

Give individuals the same tax break employees get. Most people who have a problem with preexisting conditions are trying to buy insurance in the individual market. Unless they are self-employed, they get virtually no tax relief, and even the self-employed are penalized vis-à-vis employer-provided insurance. All insurance should get the same tax relief regardless of where it is obtained, and individuals should get the same tax relief regardless of how they obtain their insurance. 

Allow providers to repackage and reprice their services under Medicare and Medicaid. Most providers today are trapped in a payment system that encourages high-cost, low-quality care. Encourage innovative solutions to the care of diabetes, asthma, cancer, heart disease, etc. Providers should be able to offer a different bundle of services and be paid in a different way as long as they reduce the government’s overall cost and provide a higher quality of care. 

© Georgia Public Policy Foundation (February 26, 2010). Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided the author and his affiliations are cited.