The Missing Element from Reform - Choice

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/17/opinion/17wyden.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&pagewanted=print
"MY guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition," President Obama said last week in an address to Congress on health care reform. It's a good principle, one that may determine the ultimate success or failure of reform, but unfortunately it's not really guiding the Senate bill unveiled on Wednesday or any of the other health reform legislation now under consideration in Congress.  Under the nation's current employer-based system, most people have little if any choice about where they get their insurance. They just have to accept the plan that comes with their job. That insurance company, in turn, is provided a captive group of customers, so it has no incentive to earn their loyalty.  Empowering Americans to choose from a broad selection of health plans would turn the tables. Those insurers that charged affordable rates and provided good coverage would attract more customers, while those that treated customers badly would be forced to change their ways or go out of business. To stay competitive, insurers would need to follow the example of places like the Mayo Clinic and offer good, low-cost coverage."

That health care 'insurance' (really more often a pre-paid service plan) comes through our employers is a result of govt interventions in the market place through tax policy. The fact that the current systems is perversely incentivized to drive prices higher while removing choice and consumer power is becoming the justification for additional government intervention. The 'intervention begets future intervention' pattern is so pervasive, we would be wise to assume it will happen with every govt intervention.