Skylandia has this great post up about how health insurance is not like car insurance. This is a false equivalency that’s just as bad as the idea that government budgeting is just like household budgeting, and resistance to changing the model puts women at additional risk.
I wish I could put this in front of the legislator who said that women should not get assistance paying for abortion, even after rape, because he makes sure he has a spare tire on his car. False equivalencies and wrong models like this are putting women’s lives and health at risk.
I’d like to take Skylandia’s conclusions one step farther in terms of appropriate comparisons with in the US political system. She says that a closed model – with everybody in – is the appropriate approach for health insurance, because everybody is going to need it at some point. In US terms, this is like saying that health insurance should work more like Social Security – everyone pays in, automatically, and it’s there for everyone (in reality, nearly everyone).
That’s what makes this, as Skylandia says, reliable insurance, and not a bet or gamble, like car insurance is. This is why the individual mandate is absolutely essential to improving health insurance and health care in this country. A public option would have been better yet, but it got killed off by the same people who want to get rid of Social Security. Do you see a trend here?
“Every man for himself” is not the best approach when it comes to health care – especially women’s health care, which is already under-protected.