Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Obamacare Reset: A Free Market Vision for Health Care Reform
Obamacare Reset: A Free Market Vision for Health Care Reform
Feb 25, 2026 4:37 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
David Brooks Is onto Something. Christians Take Note.
A recent New York Times op-ed took to task the “elites” who thumb their noses at Trump supporters. Maybe if the smart set listened more and harangued less they’d better understand why so many of their fellow citizens vote the way they do. Read More… It has taken some time but there are signs that the cultural elites, members of what has been called America’s “ruling class,” have started to engage in some long overdue self-examination as it relates to...
The Rise, Fall, and Rise of Faith-Based Poverty Work
As this eight-part series on the passionate conservative” es to a close, there is hope, despite the failures of centralized programs of the past. In cities and towns across America, people of faith, privately and quietly, are still making a difference in individual lives. Read More… Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) summarized what happened to George W. Bush’s 2001 anti-poverty “faith-based” initiative this way: It started out “with a certain merit, and you hope to God, literally, that you’re doing the...
When a Judge Is Forced Off the Bench
Attempts to remove Judge Pauline Newman, a brilliant jurist but a thorn in the sides of her colleagues, are both unconstitutional and deeply unfair. The consequences if successful will prove devastating not only to her legacy but also to due process itself. Read More… “Bury the lead!” is certainly unusual editorial advice but possibly the only good strategy for an essay on the vagaries of the federal court system. You never want your readers to know that they might find...
The Gen Z Marriage Paradox
Those in Gen Z appear to have grasped that the collapse of marriage and raising children in single-parent households have had terrible social and personal consequences. So why aren’t they acting like it? Read More… Marriage—an institution as old as time—is increasingly under threat. The marriage rate has fallen 60% since 1970, and the number of children living in working-class, married-parent families fell from 85% to 55% in the same time frame. Two-thirds of Americans believe that two unmarried, cohabitating...
The Firemen’s Ball: When Comedy Made Ideology Cringe
es a time when speaking sensibly about politics es impossible. Enter the clowns. Read More… Miloš Forman was an incredibly famous director in the 1980s, when his Amadeus (1984) won eight Oscars out of 11 nominations, and Ragtime (1981) also received eight nominations, period pieces about music’s potential for social transformation, ing prejudices or conventions, and making a new world. Similarly, in the 1970s he made very well-regarded pro-counterculture and antiwar movies like Taking Off (1971) and the musical Hair...
Servility, Vanity, and Lack of Conviction: Welcome to College
In 1967, the University of Chicago released the Kalven Report, which in tumultuous times sought to articulate the core mission of the university: to generate and disseminate knowledge. The Report needs to be revisited. Read More… Why the gnashing of teeth over the recent Supreme Court decision on affirmative action? Why have some schools responded by eliminating legacy admissions? What does the controversy tell us about how we understand the university itself? Others have observed that affirmative action debates almost...
Gen Z at Work: Its Superpower Isn’t What You Think
Spoiler alert: It’s not TikTok. Read More… My professional career was born into a world of remote work. In the summer of 2021, I kicked off my first “real” internship at a pany in Washington D.C.—and never once stepped foot in the office. There was no water cooler, office banter, or real “face time” with coworkers. In fact, my first corporate interactions, for better or worse, were all through the unforgiving, unfulfilling medium of Zoom. I’ve been blessed with perhaps...
The Habsburg Way and Ours
A new book by the archduke of Austria offers insights into what contributed to his illustrious ancestors’ success in ruling a multiethnic empire. But could any of it be relevant to 21st-century America? Read More… Lord Acton believed that “the only real political noblesse on the Continent is the Austrian.” In The Habsburg Way, Eduard Habsburg, archduke of Austria and Hungarian ambassador to the Holy See and the Sovereign Order of Malta, has written a charming and insightful book. Despite...
Threats to Religious Freedom in Australia
Recent legislation and several troubling incidents have challenged freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and even property rights in Australia. Many traditional Christians are extremely concerned about their status within an otherwise tolerant nation. What’s next? Read More… Australia is a liberal democracy monly celebrated as a model of multiculturalism. Its legal framework could be described as a Westminster appropriation of American republicanism. Section 116 of the Australian constitution states: “The Commonwealth [federal government] shall not make any law for...
Tyranny, Inc. and the Future of American Labor
Do American workers find high-tech working conditions increasingly oppressive and intrusive? Are they finding it more difficult even to earn a living wage than workers did, say, 70 years ago? Compact editor Sohrab Ahmari’s new book examines what’s ailing American labor. But is the solution worse than the problem? Read More… Tyranny, Inc. is the best book yet published by a writer associated with the “postliberal” movement. Ahmari’s argument is focused and topical, he offers spirited critiques without ranting, and...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved