WATCH: On health care, does the Libertarian Party’s plan sound like … – Salon

Posted: May 28, 2017 at 8:10 am

While the Libertarian Party doesnt have much political power in the United States, the libertarian philosophy is alive and well within the Republican Party when it comes to certain issues. When you listen to the most conservative Republicans denounce health care programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare, their language is remarkably similar to that used by libertarians. Take Nicholas Sarwark, the chairman of the Libertarian Party. When I interviewedhim for Salon earlier thismonth about how a strictly free market approach to health care wouldaffect Americasmost vulnerable and cited real examples of a diabetic person, a severely depressed individualand someonewith unspecific lower back pain, Sarwark started out with a valid critique of the Affordable Care Actand then turned to more abstract issues. Sarwark began by describing a libertarian congressional candidate with diabetes, Andy Craig of Wisconsin, who he saiddesperately wants to be able to just buy the insulin he needs from a provider and use it. Right? Its the same stuff every day. He cant right now due to government regulation, both in making insulin a prescription-only product in his state even though its safe and effective and could be sold over the counter so its more expensive, and in requiring him to pay for health insurance, which is not really insurance if its something you already know youre going to buy.

This is a valid point, but it doesntdiscredit the conceptof government-run health care. To me, if anything, Sarwarkmakes a strong case for a government-run health care system, which would allow diabetics to receive the medications they need without having to worry about thecost. Of course, thiswould be anathema to a libertarian like Sarwark, which is why the second half of his response railed against the very notion of government-funded insurance:

We dont have car insurance that covers gas and oil changes because thats insane, Sarwarksaid. Youre insuring against a risk of something happening that you dont know if its going to happen. A chronic condition is not insurable. Theres a cost sharing that can be done; there are discounts that can be done. But the first step in having a real discussion about this is recognizing the difference between insurable risks, whichyou know onthe drive to work I get in a car accident and break both of my legs. Thats a risk that is insurable.

That is all well and good. But it doesnt address the issues of the individuals I cited, all employed in full-time jobs and making nowhere near enough money to be able to afford insurance for their medical conditions without the ACA to protect them.

Read more:

WATCH: On health care, does the Libertarian Party's plan sound like ... - Salon

Related Posts