Recently, Glenn Beck posted a transcript from his radio show. The Car Insurance Analogy That Puts Health Insurance Into Perspective is an attempt to make the case that health insurance is not a right; however, there are a number of issues with his argument.
“Would anyone think it’s fair to say to an auto insurance company, I’m not going to buy any auto insurance unless I’m in a wreck. I need a policy. And they can’t turn you down for the wreck you’ve just had.”
First of all, people are not cars. That one is pretty obvious. Although I understand the attempt to relate one to another, all this does is further the argument that many conservatives just do not understand how health insurance works; also, they have zero compassion or empathy. I am not an automobile. I am sure there are times my husband would like to have me totalled and replaced with a brand new model, but that’s not how it works.
Secondly, it is absurd to compare someone with a pre-existing condition trying to obtain insurance to a person who has just had a wreck. And a pre-existing condition lasts forever. Once you have it, it is always there. It does not roll off your record in three years. With this attitude, one would never be able to get insurance. Additionally, there is no way to get misdiagnoses removed. Anyone who has been diagnosed with a rare or even a chronic illness has likely had a slew of bad diagnoses leading up to the correct one.
“That’s what the left says. You have to have auto insurance. First of all, it’s not true in every state. But still, the bottom line, you’re right. It makes no sense if you can get it after the fact.”
Car insurance is required in most states, and for a very good reason. It exists to protect everyone from the higher costs of uninsured motorists. I live in the reddest of red states, Mississippi, and they have mandated auto insurance here; the initial penalty for not having an insurance card is $1,000 and suspension of driving privileges for one year or until the motor vehicle owner shows proof of insurance. The fines for not having it are much higher than the fine for not obtaining health insurance via the Affordable Care Act. The hypocrisy here sounds like vehicles are much more important than people. It is Mississippi, though, so who is really surprised?
“And while you have incredible compassion for people in those positions, you have to find a different way to handle it and deal with that issue, rather than forcing it on everybody.”
I am overwhelmed by the compassion. What is the alternative way? Seriously. Having older people pay half or all of their gross yearly income for health insurance? Allowing individuals to opt out of every single thing that does not apply to them? That is a huge problem in itself. If you have ever tried to purchase a separate vision policy, you know how this works. The only people who purchase vision are those who need glasses or contacts. The amount you pay for the insurance is the cost of the exam and glasses. It is basically a savings account. It’s the only way the insurance companies will not lose money. Were we do that with everything, like maternity, child visits, mammograms, etc., it would end up the same way.
If Mississippi can require auto insurance for everyone, I have no idea why we cannot require people to have health insurance. If they do not have it, they will end up in the emergency room, at a much higher cost, unable to pay the bill. And guess who will end up funding it? The taxpayers. Insurance for everyone is cheaper, safer, and healthier.