The Affordable Care Act hinges its success potential on the requirement that everyone must have health insurance. The logic behind a broad risk pool is clear. All Americans, rich, poor, healthy, unhealthy, young and old, must be part of the pool to eventually see more affordable health care costs. We can argue the way the act was constructed and forced into existence, but the fact remains that there are some foreseeable benefits.
Going a step further, there are other perceived "injustices" in the insurance industry that negatively impact the lives of Americans. Some specific perils such as floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, avalanches, etc. can be extremely expensive for some homeowners to insure. Why is flood insurance so expensive? Simply because only residents of buildings most likely to flood have insurance. Same is true for earthquakes and hurricanes. The solution is to get everyone into the pool and make the coverage more affordable. If we can require a sixty-four old woman to carry maternity insurance, we can certainly require people in North Dakota or Minnesota to have hurricane coverage. It's only fair.
Most if not all states require auto insurance as a condition of owning a vehicle. There is little voiced objection to the state mandates. Granted, there is a bit more choice in the fact that nobody is required to own a car, so technically not all people are required to have auto insurance. There are some questions arising out of things like no-fault coverage, where ones own insurance may cover an injury, even when riding as a passenger in someone elses vehicle. Perhaps states may want to consider mandatory limited auto insurance coverage for everyone, even non-auto owners. That's another topic for another day.
Comments (2)Subscribe to CommentsComment