-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Check it out: <URL:
http://www.smartvoter.org/2004/03/02/ca/state/vote/maden_c/ >
Comments are welcome.
~Chris
- --
Chris Maden, Libertarian for California State Assembly
District 12, San Francisco, 2004
Individual Freedom - Personal Responsibility - Prosperity for All
Looks good to me.
If I would recommend any change it would be something more concrete
Dear Everyone and Chris;
The following question was asked and Chris replied.
What should the Legislature be doing to address the needs of
Californians without health insurance?
Getting out of the way. Legislation and regulation, however well-
intentioned, inevitably drives of cost through compliance paperwork
and limited competition.
My Health Insurance Question:
If it were possible to have a single payer Universal health
insurance plan in California. A plan which would replace all health
insurance policies and the workers compensation health program.
The goal being simple reimbursement of medical expenses - no
bureacracy - universal coverage - premiums being paid by the user or
employer - no HMO managers getting revenue for high salaries and
bonuses - limited hospital and doctors office medical forms.
Would you support such a proposal?
Ron Getty
SF Libertarian
--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Christopher R. Maden"
<crism@m...> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
My Health Insurance Question:
If it were possible to have a single payer Universal health
insurance plan in California. A plan which would replace all health
insurance policies and the workers compensation health program.
I would not support a government-run single-payer health plan even if it
worked smoothly and efficiently. First, I think that's a nonsense
question: I don't believe any tax-funded monopoly can continue to operate
efficiently without any competitive pressure. But even if it were
possible, it would still be funded by force, and I can't support that.
However, most of my constituents do support tax-funded programs, so
addressing the ineffectiveness of them is a better campaign strategy than
trying to convince them that taxation is theft.
~Chris
- --
Chris Maden, Libertarian for California State Assembly
District 12, San Francisco, 2004
Individual Freedom - Personal Responsibility - Prosperity for All
Dear Chris;
In my statement about the Universal healthcare I made note of the fact it was to be a USER PAID PLAN funded by USERS OR EMPLOYERS. At no point did I say anything about a government run plan or a tax-funded monoply funded by force.
Where you got that idea from the question below totally befuddles me. Any hints on how you got a government funded plan out of the question as originally written below?
Below is my original un-amended question.
" If it were possible to have a single payer Universal health
insurance plan in California. A plan which would replace all health insurance policies and the workers compensation health program.
The goal being simple reimbursement of medical expenses - no
bureacracy - universal coverage - premiums being paid by the user or employer - no HMO managers getting revenue for high salaries and bonuses - limited hospital and doctors office medical forms. "
Ron Getty
SF Libertarian
"Christopher R. Maden" <crism@...> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
My Health Insurance Question:
If it were possible to have a single payer Universal health
insurance plan in California. A plan which would replace all health
insurance policies and the workers compensation health program.
I would not support a government-run single-payer health plan even if it
worked smoothly and efficiently. First, I think that's a nonsense
question: I don't believe any tax-funded monopoly can continue to operate
efficiently without any competitive pressure. But even if it were
possible, it would still be funded by force, and I can't support that.
However, most of my constituents do support tax-funded programs, so
addressing the ineffectiveness of them is a better campaign strategy than
trying to convince them that taxation is theft.
~Chris
- --
Chris Maden, Libertarian for California State Assembly
District 12, San Francisco, 2004
Individual Freedom - Personal Responsibility - Prosperity for All
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
In my statement about the Universal healthcare I made note of the fact it
was to be a USER PAID PLAN funded by USERS OR EMPLOYERS. At no point did I
say anything about a government run plan or a tax-funded monoply funded by
force.
Sorry - not reading carefully.
" If it were possible to have a single payer Universal health
insurance plan in California. A plan which would replace all health
insurance policies and the workers compensation health program.The goal being simple reimbursement of medical expenses - no
bureacracy - universal coverage - premiums being paid by the user or
employer - no HMO managers getting revenue for high salaries and bonuses -
limited hospital and doctors office medical forms. "
My support or lack thereof as an Assembly member would be irrelevant if it
were voluntary. Would the state mandate participation? If so, then force
is being exerted against would-be competitors, and I wouldn't support
it. If not, then I think it's fine - but I also don't think it would last
very long, as competitors could most likely undercut premiums for at least
some groups.
I think that employer-funded health care is part of the problem. The
market distortions introduced by tax-break incentives mean that the
consumer of health care is not the customer, which interrupts the feedback
necessary for an efficient market. Health care plans in which employees
can choose from among a few providers are a little better, but only
slightly (since there are enrollment windows and lock-in periods which
minimize choice). I had a personal policy from K-P, and when they pissed
me off, I gave them the boot. Hard to do that through employer health care.
~Chris
- --
Chris Maden, Libertarian for California State Assembly
District 12, San Francisco, 2004
Individual Freedom - Personal Responsibility - Prosperity for All
Chris,
Perhaps a good compromise could be to put out the idea that taxation is theft, without pushing people to agree with you. For instance, mention the "possibility" that taxation is theft, and then go on to talk about the ineffectiveness of particular programs. Or just say something like "People ought to be able to decide which programs they want to support instead of someone else making that decision for them," the unstated implication being that some might decide not to support any of the programs.
Yours in liberty,
<<< Starchild >>>
(in part):