> I think EVERY Republican can get behind these thoughts as every other Democrat, but forcing me to pay for it, when I just want to live off the land in some small town somewhere. Complete overreach and strictly unconstitutional.
Well, let's put that to the test. I consider myself pretty liberal. Here's what I think about your bullet list.
* Re: individual mandate
I actually agree with you very strongly on this. When the government wants to force me to pay for something, there's already a long-established way to do that: taxes, with services rendered by the government and thus fully accountable to the people. Forcing us to pay for private services sounds awfully similar to forcing us to pay for British tea, which isn't supposed to be how our country works. If the government wants to force us to pay for health insurance, they should tax us and provide universal coverage.
* Preexisting conditions cannot be denied and should be slightly elevated costs compared to the average user.
Agreed on preexisting conditions, disagreed on higher costs for the affected. "Slightly" quickly becomes a loophole that enables "outrageous". And anyone who lives long enough will eventually acquire a condition anyway. Seems kinda redundant to optimize for that. Just distribute the cost evenly with the understanding that everyone will eventually receive the benefit.
* Age 26 under the parents health care plan, fine, but damnit kid, get a job. Do something with yourself.
That's what the original post is about. When kids have health care, it's easier for them to make their own jobs instead of going out and begging someone else for them. Sounds like a win for this audience on HN, no?
* Birth Control, yes and no. We should be able to opt out paying for it, especially if it goes against my religion and frankly it does, but I won't stop others from opting in and paying for it.
The goal of health-related regulation should be to improve health-related access and outcomes. There is no question, based on data, that birth control improves women's health, allows them to finish school or further their careers in greater numbers, and eventually increases their lifetime earnings potential, which of course contributes back. If you make exceptions for people's precious feelings, you're looking at an awfully slippery slope. I envision a bunch of assholes declaring that they will opt out of vaccines for religious reasons, then everyone else starts opting out of paying for vaccines and, well, hello again Mr. Measles. No, terrible idea. You don't have to like the latest military campaign to acknowledge the need to pay for a military, and likewise, you don't need to approve of the way others behave to acknowledge the social benefits of birth control.
* Remove the boundries of the state borders. This is regulation. Not allowing companies to work and provide across state lines is ridiculous and again government overreach that could quickly drive down costs.
Sure.
* Lastly, I want hospital prices published. I want to shop around.
This just doesn't work unless you publish a single price list at the national level and force all health providers to honor that list (Japan). There are two problems. One, sometimes your health needs are too immediate to allow shopping, and you're beholden to whoever happens to pick you up and treat you. If you're bleeding out on the road, you're not gonna stop someone from calling the ambulance just so you can go on yelp and find the best service. Seems like a bad idea to build policy around the assumption that buying health care is like shopping for shampoo. Two, as a person who is likely not a medical professional, you probably wouldn't be able to make sense of any such price list with respect to your needs. Any such list would be detailed beyond the common person's understanding (see Japan), and anyway, you would need to seek diagnosis to know what to pay for in the first place.