To me, the HSA approach has exceptionally good promise, because it provides incentive for each individual to shop services. (The usual objection to this is something like “well, you can’t shop services if you’re having a heart attack” — — yes, obviously. But 99% of all medical services are NOT critical emergency. It’s therefore a faux objection.)
Obviously, the devil is in the details, and it’s a shame that Democrats won’t consider HSA’s, because they would prone to devise an HSA system that actually works well financially; the GOP keeps trying to shortchange the system.
At any rate, a system run at the state level (required to provide certain levels of coverage by federal law) that employed HSAs with adequate public funding of initial accounts has potential.
Alternatively, the Swiss system would fit nicely into the existing health care mileu in the US, without ripping up the grass too much. In Switzerland, each state (canton) runs their own system according to federal guidelines, as I mentioned above. They are free to run it and collect taxes for it any way they wish. Their feds mandate a policy of minimum coverage which individual can then buy riders to depending on their own situation and priorities. Insurers are not permitted to make a profit on the base plans, just the riders.
Healthcare in Switzerland - Wikipedia
Healthcare in Switzerland is universal and is regulated by the Swiss Federal Law on Health Insurance. There are no free…
Let me add a word about the insurers. We WANT to keep the insurers. Why? Because they are extremely sophisticated at finding, rooting out, and preventing fraud. Governments aren’t good at this. So, for all intents and purposes, we’re “hiring” the insurers (for the price of their profit margins) to prevent taxpayer money being fraudulently stolen.