Why is this a Government Issue?

IMG_9956a

Yesterday I went to the Capitol for the “Religious Freedom Rally.” It was a thrill to be joined by so many others who understand the importance of preserving our religious freedom.

IMG_0045a

Insurance is designed to help the policy holder recover from a catastrophe.  We buy homeowners insurance in case a fire destroys our home.  We buy life insurance in case the chief wage-earner of the household dies.  We buy car insurance in case we have a car accident.  We don’t buy car insurance in case we need an oil change or our wiper blades replaced.

First, some ground rules:

1.)    The word “insurance” is not interchangeable with the word “health”.

2.)    The word “health” is not interchangeable with the word “contraception”.

3.)    The word “access” is not interchangeable with the word “free”.

4.)    The word “contraception” is not defined as a medical crisis any more than the words “braces”, “lasik surgery” or “tummy tuck”.

Therefore, it seems odd that questions of what ought to be covered by private insurance are making headline news.

This struggle is over a philosophy.

IMG_9969a

This is about government forcing insurance companies to pay for abortifacients, sterilizations and contraceptives. Most proponents of the Obamacare mandate are accusing the other side of trying to “block women’s access to health” (i.e. not offering free contraceptives for all).   Without Obamacare, routine maintenance would continue as it is today, but the heart of the matter rests in what should be ordered by the government.

Curiously, those in favor of abortion have said for years that it is none of the government’s business what happens between a woman and her doctor.  Now that they want insurance to pay for their behavioral options, they want big government in charge.

The private insurance industry is at a crossroads.  Either it will remain a free market entity or it will be turned into another branch of our national government, managed by a new gang of bureaucrats who are allowed to make unlimited profits off a citizenry forced to buy whatever they sell.

The Economic Realities:

It is a fallacy to believe that birth control insurance coverage would be any bargain.  If the insurance companies were free to write insurance policies for any amount of coverage the individual desired, those who wanted birth control would buy it, and those who didn’t want it wouldn’t.  The people who wanted birth control, insurance would pay about an amount equal to the cost of the birth control plus an administrative handling fee.  They might figure out that it costs them more than what they would spend were they to make their own direct purchases.

The true purpose is to force those who don’t want birth control to subsidize it for others.  We are already doing this by  all the governmental programs that offer free birth control.

Perhaps if these envelopes were marked, “Here is the free birth control, lubricant and instructions you ordered”, the parents would handle it differently.

Why should insurance companies have to pay for birth control when government is already doing this?  After being in the legislature for eight years, I understand the motivating force behind this effort.  People are afraid we will bring more children into the state needing taxpayer support, and they believe that birth control will lessen the numbers needing government help.  However, the studies don’t show this to be true.  If you ask unmarried mothers why they had a baby, the last excuse you will hear is that she had no access to birth control.  Many single mothers wanted to have a baby or intentionally didn’t use birth control.

The new pricing structure would reflect higher prices for all.  Because the direct transaction is replaced by third parties, there would be a lack of cost constraints.  Mandated birth control is no bargain for anyone.  Additionally, some women may try experimenting with birth control, since it is now “free for all”.

The higher price of insurance prompts consumers to over consume to “get their money’s worth”.   As this new structure creates the appearance that it is a better deal to consume more insurance benefits, some will become infected with STDs and will increase abortion rates.  This will put further demand on other health care services.

We have many reasons to be concerned anytime government tries to dictate a “one size fits all” requirement because it leads to a loss of our freedom.

This is not about insurance.  It is about your government turning what happens in the bedrooms into a “free for all”.  If it were truly designed for “free essentials”, why doesn’t it include free eyeglasses, hearing aids and braces?

Ultimately, an insurance mandate is the same as a tax—one that doesn’t belong in a free market society.  As your next Lieutenant Governor, you will have someone in office who is willing to “Call Their Bluff”.

Your thoughts on birth control mandates are important to me, so please share what you think here:
Mail to Cynthia

IMG_0025a