This is Viewpoints for Wednesday, March 29, 2017

A better way

Mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients is one of those feel good ideas and great for politicians to promise in order to get votes, but it’s no better than mandatory drug testing to get a job. It’s intrusive and demeaning. And since it’s Republicans pushing it, that means it would just enrich their cronies who own drug testing labs at taxpayer expense.

A far better idea is to cut off public assistance to anyone who commits a crime while receiving welfare. If the recipient or one of their dependent children commits a crime, all public assistance is cut off. First offense, six months. Second offense, one year. Third offense, lifetime ban from all public assistance.

Easy solution

A solution to distracted driving is easy. Program cell phones to turn themselves off when they exceed 5 mph and when the user’s voice is louder than a church whisper.

Where does all our money go?

American University of Beirut, a recipient of U.S. government aid, has agreed to pay $700,000 to settle a civil lawsuit over accusations that it assisted three organizations linked to the militant group Hezbollah. As part of its deal with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan, the university also agreed to revise its policies.

American University of Beirut has been receiving funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development for years. Part of the deal was the requirement to take reasonable steps providing material support to entities on the Treasury Department’s prohibited list. But they did not. They admitted to training representatives of al Nour Radio and al Manar TV, media groups listed as branches of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah.

The American University of Beirut allowed representatives from al Nour and al Manar to participate in various workshops. One workshop was titled “Citizen/Online Journalism” and provided instruction on how to produce blogs, videos and podcasts. Federal prosecutors said the university’s website was used to connect students with organizations linked to Hezbollah. I wonder how many other terrorist organizations benefit from unsupervised US aid?

Economic mystery

I don’t understand all the mystery about health insurance and why it costs so much. Duhhh. Health insurance costs a lot because health care costs a lot. Anybody noted how auto insurance has risen over the years? Same reason. It costs more now because auto repair costs more now. Plastic bumpers, front and rear. In the old days a slight bump meant nothing to a chrome bumper. Now it’s a cool grand to replace (not repair) a cracked plastic bumper front or rear.

The only way to decrease health insurance costs is to reduce health care costs, or reduce/eliminate the profits to the health insurance companies and health care providers. What are these costs? Simply speaking, the cost to a consumer (or insurance company) for health care is equal to the actual cost of providing the service, (labor plus drugs and other expendables) plus the profit to the providers. Labor costs in health care are relative high. Providers require a lot of expensive training, certification, etc, and health care is an inelastic demand, economically speaking. Normally, when something costs a lot, demand for it decreases, since fewer people can afford it. But that basic economic theory doesn’t work with health care. Demand for it (when someone is sick) is independent of how much it costs. Some people are even thinking that health care is a basic human right, and that healthy people should pay for getting sick people well, including the smokers, drinkers, risk takers who get themselves sick.

Another economic theory is that when something is plentiful, even in excess, the price for it goes down, due to competition among providers. So it might reduce health-care costs if more health care providers are flooded into the market, and people are allowed to shop around for the best deal. But like any other service, that runs the risk of substandard service. The old adage, you get what you pay for. Same thing for drugs, cheaper may not be better.

All insurance is a risk sharing gamble. Insurance companies calculate their premiums based on the expected expenses of paying claims plus profit for their companies. They are betting that claims will be less than premiums paid to them. When there is an unexpected rise in claims due to some reason or other, they might lose money for a while, but history has proven they are pretty shrewd at making a profit over the long haul by computing appropriate premiums. Just look at the impressive and costly insurance company buildings and insurance agents are well paid.

So, one might ask, why not just scrap the whole free market health-care system and go to government price controlled single payer system? Does that type of system reduce national defense costs? Hardly. Defense industry providers make huge profits also. Is health care better under socialist governments? Debatable. American free market capitalism has stood the test of time for providing the best standard of life for the largest number of people. Why do you think the whole world wants to come here and live?

What’s the goal?

The failure to pass Paul Ryan’s American Health Care Act on Friday was a blessing in disguise for most Americans except our richest citizens. If it had passed, after 10 years, 24 million Americans would be without health insurance. How could this be considered good for most of us?

For the past seven years the congressional GOP has defeated every attempt by congressional Democrats to improve Obamacare/ACA in their never ending wish to see Obamacare fail. The GOP platform wants to repeal the ACA, privatize Medicare and Social Security and block grant Medicaid and end its expansion to our neediest citizens.

Let’s see if Trump, Ryan and the GOP will honestly work in the near future for the improvement of Obamacare and the enrollment of our uninsured into Medicaid and a better quality of life.A single payer heath care system like Medicare should be our goal.

This story was originally published March 28, 2017 at 9:00 PM with the headline "This is Viewpoints for Wednesday, March 29, 2017."