Think It Out, I

The following is a (heavily edited) version of a Facebook comment I left on a friend's thread, vis-a-vis the fears that Justice Barret may strike down the ACA, aka Obamacare.

I quite understand the concern of people who may lose their healthcare; and I do feel, as a Catholic, that healthcare for those who can't afford it is one of those things that society has an obligation to provide.  Of course, there are other ways to provide healthcare besides government, and local governments might arguably be better than the federal government at providing it ...

But setting all that aside, my personal experience with Obamacare has been negative. It led to my rates being hiked--of course; for someone has to pay for those who can't afford their own healthcare, and I was young, employed, and healthy when the bill was passed--but, what bothered me more, Obamacare made it more difficult for me to get the sort of high deductible plan I was interested in, as a young healthy person with sufficient savings.

So I suppose what I'd like to see, if indeed the plan were to be struck down, would be something that protected people with lower incomes and those with preexisting conditions but also allowed for more ... consumer discretion?

This, however, is tricky, because there will always be people who do foolish things, like purchasing houses (cf. Fannie/Freddie crisis) and healthcare plans that they can't afford.  I know I could afford high deductibles, but not everyone can, and some people would try to cut corners, and then the taxpayer would end up footing the bill.  (Again, cf. the housing crisis.)  So should I, the prudent person, have my choice of healthcare plans restricted by the government because other people, granted the same freedom, would inevitably be imprudent?

I can understand why some would argue that way, but as a conservative (surprise!) I don't think that's the right solution.

One alternative might be to have some sort of means-tested provision, e.g., if you can check a box claiming that you have more than X amount in savings, or saved more than Y amount every month for the past year, then you are permitted a high deductible plan.  That wouldn't necessarily penalize poor people, the way an income-based means test would, though of course plenty of people would lie about their savings, and there would doubtless be other unforeseen consequences--as there always are, of any regulations, and the less foreseen the more complex the regulations are.  (#reasonsforconservatism)