Vail Daily letter: Government ‘competition’? Right |

Vail Daily letter: Government ‘competition’? Right

Vail Daily
Vail, CO Colorado

Proponents of the health care bill claim the so-called “government option” provides much-needed competition, but what good is more competition when nothing has been done to remove the barriers to competition that currently exist?

A quick search reveals no less than 40 health insurance companies currently doing business in the United States. Does anyone truly believe one more insurer is needed just to provide “competition”?

Congress created a heavily regulated environment that shields insurance companies from competition and prevents the free market from working. Free markets rely on the application of economic pressures that occur naturally between businesses, their competitors and their customers.

In a free-market economy, businesses must offer products that customers want or need at a price they are willing to pay. Businesses that don’t will fail. Either they will succumb to market forces and change their business model by offering better products that people do want at prices they are willing to pay, or they will go out of business.

Businesses cannot force customers to pay for goods or services they don’t want. But that is what the government now intends to do.

How is that in any way considered “competition”? The very notion of the government as a “competitor” is absurd because the government is immune to market pressures and cannot be forced out of business!

Bad businesses must be allowed to fail. For the government to intervene by protecting and subsidizing failing businesses is to interfere with economic pressures that occur naturally in free markets.

For the government to get into the business of business claiming to be a competitor is a


Such claims are a deliberate misstatement of economic realities to further a bigger agenda, bigger government controlling an ever-greater portion of the nation’s economy.

Government intervention in the free market introduces artificial forces that alter or eliminate free-market forces, producing unnatural, usually undesirable results along with myriad unintended consequences.

Besides that, it’s all unconstitutional and should never have been permitted. Of course, congressional advocates claim their attorneys say otherwise, but lawyers are paid to cast doubt on the obvious and make the ridiculous seem plausible. And that is exactly what has happened.

The health care bill does nothing to eliminate interstate barriers to competition and it does nothing to address tort reform.

While tort reform is certainly no silver-bullet solution that can solve all problems, tort reform absolutely must be part of any rational attempt at true health care reform, and if the goal is to increase competition among insurers, then why does this bill do nothing to eliminate barriers to interstate competition? It also does nothing to correct and standardize the absurd and arcane medical coding system.

The bill Congress passed is not rational and it does nothing to reduce health care costs, nor does it improve efficiencies or add genuine competition, but it does increase the size and scope of the federal government, extending government control ever deeper into all our lives.

Buddy Shipley, Edwards

Support Local Journalism