Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Obamacare Reset: A Free Market Vision for Health Care Reform
Obamacare Reset: A Free Market Vision for Health Care Reform
Dec 30, 2025 6:13 PM

“We are now three years into health care ‘reform’ and it is crystal clear that what we have is no reform at all,” says Dr. Nick Pandelidis in this week’s Acton Commentary. “As we are seeing, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as is typical of so many government program names, will result in just the opposite e. PPACA is unaffordable, it will harm patients, and it will do incalculable damage to human dignity.” The full text of his essay follows. Subscribe to the free, weekly Acton News & Commentary and other publications here.

Obamacare Reset: A Free Market Vision for Health Care Reform

byNick Pandelidis

We are now three years into health care “reform” and it is crystal clear that what we have is no reform at all. As we are seeing, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as is typical of so many government program names, will result in just the opposite e. PPACA is unaffordable, it will harm patients, and it will do incalculable damage to human dignity.

It is helpful to remind ourselves why there has been such a broad, bipartisan push for health care reform in recent years. Largely that consensus was built on two factors: Access and uncontrolled health care cost growth. Of the two, access for the uninsured and those with pre-existing conditions has been the more emotionally charged, politicized, and demagogued issue.

Access for the uninsured and those with pre-existing conditions must be addressed but the magnitude of the problem is smaller and more manageable than the political rhetoric would lead us to believe. It is also subordinate to the primary issue of unaffordable healthcare and health insurance. Lowering the cost of health care and health insurance would go a long way to lowering the numbers of the uninsured.

Despite all the rhetoric and acrimony of the health care debate, there is still much confusion about the nature of the two main opposing visions for reform: One is based in central government control and the other on individual freedom.

President Obama’s health care “reform” is built on bureaucratic medical decision making and massive deficit spending. In stark contrast, a market-based health care reform approach would be based on individual freedom and personal responsibility. This market-based, or free market approach, would be financially viable, would lower costs, and would improve quality of and access to health care. It’s not too late to “reset” reform and craft a real, workable approach to solving healthcare access and funding problems.

Reform Must Go Forward

What are the principles underlying this free market health care reform? First, the status quo is not acceptable. Health care cost growth is unsustainable and threatens the financial well-being of individuals and families, small and large businesses and our government at all levels. Further, the poor and many with pre-existing conditions have inadequate access to health care insurance. But it must be recognized that lowering costs and a strong economy would go a long way toward improving access.

Second, there is no such thing as free health care. Everything has a cost. Like all resources, health care is limited. The real question is how to efficiently allocate limited health care resources. Economic experience has repeatedly demonstrated that limited resource allocation in a context of economic freedom, based in individual choice and personal responsibility, results in more of a particular resource for more people. That same experience has demonstrated that centralized government planning and decision making is inefficient and results in less output of a particular resource.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we have an obligation informed by justice and our faith traditions to provide health care for those who truly cannot afford to pay for these services. Our daily witness to our faith is largely lived out inkoinonia, munity, with fellow human beings in whom the faithful Christian perceives the person of Jesus Christ.

Inherent in this market-based approach are three objectives. The first is to assure that the program results in its stated e – accessible high quality health care for the recipients. The second is to assure that the money devoted to the program is not spent wastefully. Medicare mostly meets the first criterion but not the second. Medicaid fails to meet either criterion. Third, we must ensure that the program is affordable. If the program is not financially sustainable, the program’s proclaimed benefit is an empty promise.

Getting Specific

ponents of the free market vision of health care reform would look like this:

Coverage for those with pre-existing conditions:The great majority of persons with pre-existing conditions have adequate access to affordable health insurance because most have employer provided insurance. Employer-based insurance already has safeguards preventing denial of coverage or excessive premiums for those with pre-existing conditions who have maintained continuous coverage as they move from job to job. Free market reform will no longer allow panies to deny coverage to those persons who must get coverage in the individual market. This reform will also establish appropriately funded high risk pools for those who cannot afford the higher premium costs for pre-existing expensive medical conditions.

Coverage for the poor: Free market reform will provide all individuals and families with a refundable tax credit to buy health insurance. With this tax credit, the poor can buy quality health insurance, and will no longer be relegated to a second-rate Medicaid system.

Individual ownership of health insurance: Free market reform will make health care insurance refundable tax credits available to all individuals and families. Now all persons who buy insurance will have the same tax benefit as those who currently have employer-provided insurance. Further, they will no longer lose their coverage if they change or lose their job. Perhaps most importantly, this health care tax reform will greatly encourage insurance petition.

Individuals in charge of their own health care, and incentives for cost-effective health care spending: Free market reform, by promoting health care savings accounts in conjunction with catastrophic coverage, will put the money spent on health care in the hands of the consumer who actually uses the health care. This financial control restores the individual’s freedom to make their own health care decisions. Third party payers will no longer infringe on patient-physician decision making. Direct control of health care spending will also encourage individuals to utilize health care services and spend money more wisely than if someone else were paying the bills.

Transparent medical service charges: Free market reform will promote transparency of medical costs and es. Transparency will help individuals make smarter health care spending choices, and petition among providers of health care services.

petition and choice in the insurance market: Freer markets and petition will result in lower costs, more choices, and improved quality and service for the entire health insurance market. In addition to the previously discussed federal tax policy reforms and promotion of transparency, free market reform will decrease the number of mandated services so individuals can get the coverages they need and can afford. Finally, this reform will also open insurance sales across state lines.

Personal responsibility in health lifestyles: This reform will allow the young, healthy individuals and families, and those who make healthy life style choices to buy lower cost insurance that reflects their health status and lifestyle choices. Conversely, individuals who make unhealthy lifestyle choices will pay more for their health care coverage – just as drivers who have repeated accidents pay more for auto insurance than safe drivers.

Keeping the health care security promise made to our seniors: The Medicare program is projected to be insolvent within 12 years. The current defined health care benefit effectively creates unlimited demand and promotes excessive spending. Free market reform will put Medicare on sustainable financial footing by gradually transforming it from an unsustainable defined benefit program to a defined contribution plan and thereby keep the health care promise made to our seniors. Individuals of or near Medicare age would see no change in their coverage while those who are 10 years or more from Medicare enrollment would participate in the new fiscally solvent Medicare program.

Medical malpractice lawsuit abuse reform: Free market reform will further decrease health care expenditure by decreasing “defensive medicine” and unnecessary testing

Health care reform founded in the principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility will provide effective and viable remedies for unsustainable health care costs and for inadequate access for the poor and for those with pre-existing conditions. President Obama’s health care law puts our medical care into the hands of Washington bureaucrats. It’s funded by typical Washington accounting tricks and, ultimately, massive deficit entitlement spending. Free market health care reform will lower health care costs for individuals, families, small and large businesses, and government at all levels. True reform will strengthen the economy, increase employment, lower our national debt and unfunded liabilities, and restore our children’s opportunity to live in freedom and prosperity.

Dr. Nick Pandelidis practices medicine in York, Pa. He serves on the Board of Trustees of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary in Crestwood, N.Y.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Explainer: Is there enough time to confirm a Supreme Court nominee before the election?
The prospect of appointing a Supreme Court justice so close to a presidential election has roiled political discourse. Is such a move unprecedented? Is it even possible? Here are the facts you need to know. Background Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on September 18, just 46 days before the presidential election on November 3. President Donald Trump has said he will fill the vacancy, “most likely” with a female, naming his nominee at a press conference on Saturday...
FAQ: What is Yom Kippur?
This year Yom Kippur begins at sundown on Sunday, September 27, and lasts until sundown on Monday, September 28. Here are the facts you need to know about the holiest of Jewish holidays. What is Yom Kippur? Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, is the holiest day in Judaism. es 10 days after the Jewish New Year, Rosh Hashanah. Together, they are known as the “High Holy Days,” “Days of Awe” (Yamim Noraim), or “Days of Repentance.” It is traditionally...
Explainer: Can the president appoint a Supreme Court justice during an election year?
President Donald Trump has decided to fill the vacant Supreme Court seat left by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just weeks before the 2020 election. Does he have the legal and constitutional power to do so? What if he loses the election? What have other presidents done? And what about the “Biden” or “Thurmond” Rule? Here are the facts you need to know. Does the president have the power to appoint a Supreme Court justice in his final...
Donald Trump nominates Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court
President Donald Trump has nominated Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court. The 48-year-old will fill the seat left vacant by the death of 87-year-old Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on September 18. President Trump called Barrett “a woman of unparalleled achievement, towering intellect, sterling credentials and unyielding loyalty to the Constitution,” as he introduced hthe nominee in a ceremony in the White House’s Rose Garden at 5 p.m. Eastern on Saturday. He reminded the nation of the impact a...
‘A different kind of lawyer’: Amy Coney Barrett on Christian vocation
Given the recent passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, public conversation has swirled with speculation about President Donald Trump’s list of potential replacements. Leading the pack is Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a circuit judge and former Notre Dame law professor, who has attracted significant heat from progressives due to her devout Catholicism, pro-life beliefs, and fondness for originalism. Beginning with Sen. Diane Feinstein’s concern that Barrett’s Roman Catholic “dogma lives loudly within her” – expressed during her confirmation...
Acton Institute names Gregory M. Collins of Yale University the 2020 Novak Award winner
In recognition of Gregory M. Collins’ outstanding research in the fields of ethics, politics and economics, the Acton Institute will be awarding him the 2020 Novak Award. Gregory M. Collins is a postdoctoral associate and lecturer in the program on ethics, politics, and economics at Yale University. His book on Edmund Burke’s economic thought,Commerce and Manners in Edmund Burke’s Political Economy, was published by Cambridge University Press in 2020 and has already garnered significant attention inside and outside the munity....
New issue of Journal of Markets & Morality (Vol. 23, No. 1) released
After some delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the newest issue of the Journal of Markets & Morality is live on our website here. Print issues should be in the mail to subscribers sometime in the next few weeks. This issue marks the final issue for executive editor and longtime Acton research fellow Dr. Kevin Schmiesing. In his editorial to the issue, he highlights the perennial difficulty plex and important ideas: Spoken or written language is of course the medium...
High Court, high stakes: Replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg
It is extremely mon for me to read anything published by Glamour. In 2018, however, a first-person profile by Clara Spera caught my attention. Spera, a Harvard-trained attorney, shared with readers a personal portrait of her grandmother, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Over the course of the last several months as Justice Ginsburg’s health began to fade more rapidly, and then again last week when news of her death was announced, I remembered this article and the humane sincerity...
Acton Line podcast: Will-to-power conservatism with Stephanie Slade
With fusionism – the strategic alliance of conservative foreign policy hawks, social conservatives and economic libertarians knitted together in the last half of the 20th century in opposition to munism – crumbling after the fall of the Iron Curtain, the modern conservative movement has been remaking itself in effort to address the problems of the current day. One of these seemingly ascendant factions are the mon good conservatives. In an article in the October 2020 edition of Reason magazine, managing...
Alejandro Chafuen in Forbes: Is Sweden’s a model response to COVID-19?
This week, Alejandro Chafuen – the Acton Institute’s Managing Director, International – reflects in Forbes about parisons between Sweden’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and that of other countries. Sweden has been held up as a model by those who favor less exacting responses to the coronavirus and condemned by those who advocate for more severe measures. parison and data suggest that it is too early to hand down a judgment one way or the other, and his verdict is...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved