Another approach to health care reform that might work for both sides.

Stu Burguiere
Jul 20, 2017 · 2 min read

1/ Second look at this for healthcare? nationalaffairs.com/publications/d…

2/ The basics, we get rid of Obamacare, and replace it with catastrophic insurance for everyone not on Medicaid or Medicare already.

3/ The cost of this is about half of Obamacare. And with other changes outlined, would likely pay for itself completely.

4/ The downside for conservatives — you’re creating a government entitlement (though getting rid of another one.)

5/ The upside for conservatives, you save money, and make insurance into insurance again.

6/ You protect people from devastating worst case scenarios, but don’t prepay their basic medical expenses.

7/ For liberals, you are getting rid of almost all medical bankruptcy. And the plan is based on income,

8/ so that people with lower income would largely be covered for everything, middle class and up would lose the risk of catastrophe.

9/ Basic expenses could be insured outside of this program if the person chose to do so.

10/ For Trump, he would be able to claim he covered everyone, consistent with his campaign promises.

11/ I’m not completely comfortable with the idea- I’m nervous what this turns into later.

12/ I definitely would not design the system from scratch like this.

13/ However, it’s better than what we have and it might have some political ability to get through the process.

14/ The cost for upper middle and high incomes would be a tax of about 2K per person.

15/ But it’s a big tax cut from what they’re paying today, and it would lower general insurance costs,

16/ because your general insurance would no longer need to cover catastrophic benefits.

17/ Here’s a column by @bdomenech on the idea nytimes.com/2017/03/21/opi…

18/ Or here from @DouthatNYTnytimes.com/2009/10/19/opi…

19/ I think if you could combine this with encouraging longer term life insurance style purchases and the ability to form large groups

20/ As outlined by Rand Paul here foxnews.com/opinion/2017/0…

21/ And I would also argue to further means test Medicare, you could really improve things and save money.

22/ If we’re going to spend government money on health care, it should a) provide that money to the most vulnerable,

23/ b) be limited to eliminating worst case scenarios rather than everyday expenses

24/ and c) provide people with the opportunity to opt out and make their own decisions.

25/ Politically, this provides something new that would change the debate from how to slightly alter Obamacare,

26/ into one that ends with everyone having a shield against the worst, except for perhaps a few higher income people who opt out.

27/ Again, it’s not my ideal, but it’s an improvement, should get votes from both sides, and allow Trump to claim a victory.

28/ It’s worth a look.

)

Stu Burguiere

Written by

Host, The Wonderful World of Stu & Pat and Stu EP / Head Writer, Glenn Beck Program

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade