THE PLAN OF HAPPINESS
By learning and living the following principles, your life will be full of happiness, blessed with peace and enriched with enlightenment. You will experience joy beyond description and love as never before. And you will gain strength to face life’s challenges with the assurance that your actions are right!
There is a God. He created the Earth for us to live on and be tested. We are his children (spiritually), he is our Heavenly Father. We lived with Him before we were born. At birth, our memory of that time was erased so that we would live by faith. God gave us the freedom to choose right or wrong. Through prophets, God gives mankind laws (commandments). Obedience to these laws brings happiness and the blessings of God. Disobedience (sin) brings misery and the withdrawal of some of the blessings of God. Jesus Christ (God’s son) came to earth and sacrificed himself to “pay” for our forgiveness. We can be forgiven of our sins through faith in Jesus and repentance (ceasing to be disobedient).
Life is a test of faith in God and repentance from our sins. God’s enemy (the Devil) is real and constantly tempting us to live without God and in violation of his commandments. At the end of our lives we will be judged. God loves us and will bless us with a Heavenly reward commensurate with our faithfulness to Him.
Common sins of mankind:
Failure to worship God; excessive pursuit of material things and selfish goals to the exclusion of God; unnecessary work on Sunday (the Sabbath, the Lord’s Day); dishonesty; stealing; adultery; fornication; profanity.
The Lord’s church—then and now:
As foretold in the Bible, the early Christian church Jesus established fell into apostasy as men killed the church’s leaders and changed the doctrines Jesus taught. Now there are thousands of different denominations (led by men lacking authority from God) teaching their own interpretation of the Bible or following various other creeds or beliefs.
By miraculous visitations of God Himself, Jesus Christ, angels, and the translation of an ancient record, God thru a modern prophet has restored his church in modern times as He did anciently. It has the authority of God—not merely of men. It teaches for example, that family relationships can be forever. Remarkably, it is the only church that practices this important truth. It is The Church of Jesus Christ, of Latter-Day Saints. Membership in his church affords fellowship with other believers; the ordinances of salvation; and instruction about and from God.
In consequence of widespread wickedness, destructions and calamity are engulfing the world. Only through living righteously can we have peace and be saved.
Primary Requirements for Salvation and Happiness:
1) Faith in Jesus Christ,
2) Repentance from sin,
3) Baptism by proper authority,
4) The Gift of the Holy Ghost by the “laying on of hands.”
My witness:
Raised in the Presbyterian Church, I began to earnestly learn about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in 1980. My studies of it uncovered sound doctrine, wonderful friends and marvelous opportunities and experiences. A combination of missionary lessons, study, prayer, and living gospel principles yielded a conviction in my heart and soul that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the Lord’s church restored in modern times. This witness came to me through the Holy Spirit. Membership in the church has brought a mighty change in my life (through Christ). It has made life rich and brought happiness beyond my wildest imaginations. In appreciation, I share this treasure with those I make acquaintance with, in hopes that others will gain as I have. As you’ve read this brochure, if you’ve felt the truthfulness of these things, it is a witness from God’s Holy Spirit to you. I would like to have a free book delivered to you that demonstrates God’s work in modern times. With it you can receive a further witness. Please call me.
Floyd Fitzgibbons (702) 873-1315
Member - The Church of Jesus Christ,
of Latter-Day Saints
Las Vegas Mission office: (702)-312-0511
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Floyd Fitzgibbons
for U.S. Congress
District 3
Why I’m running:
I love this country, the U.S. Constitution and the sacrifices our Founding Fathers made to establish them. I have accepted the nomination of the Independent American Party in order to do my part for the cause of liberty. I am not doing this for money, prestige or power - only for the cause of liberty.
What I believe:
That men and women who are honest, wise and good should be sought for and upheld in public office. That elections should not be won or lost based on the amount of money spent on campaigns and I will not accept any campaign contributions whatsoever. That voting for a candidate should not be based on the number and look of election signs and I will not post any. That citizens should vote for the best candidate regardless of their party or perceived chances of being elected, otherwise they have compromised one of the great rights of liberty.
Money – the poison of politics:
Experience shows that money and politics are a poisonous mix. Countless are the number of politicians who have become corrupted by money. Rampant is the terrible influence on governmental decisions in pursuit of money both in reckless spending and wresting it from citizens thru heavy taxation. As rare as diamonds are the politicians who are not affected by money. The love of it truly is the root of all evil.
Candidates who raise large amounts of money from others should be viewed with the highest degree of suspicion. The tendency toward reciprocation is human nature. In some cases it literally becomes bribery. Almost any candidate who will prostitute themselves in a campaign will almost surely do the same when in office.
This being indisputable, it is obvious the proper course of action is to find politicians who will shun the influences of money – beginning in their political campaigns. This is a tangible measure of discipline and character long before the work of elected office takes place. It is my personal opinion that candidates for office should use only their own money to distribute their position on issues. That is what I have always done.
Character:
The genius of our nation is that it is a Republic – government based on laws (the highest of which is the U.S. Constitution) made by elected officials from their states or districts for the good and safety of society. It is not a democracy (which, in time, has always become “mob-rule”)! Elected officials should be those who are honest, wise and good – thus having the fortitude to stand up for true and correct principles of proper government regardless of the circumstances. Any signs of compromise in principle in a candidate will surely evolve into them becoming the object of greater manipulation once in office. Wisdom commends us to seek candidates who are steadfast and immovable in their determination to adhere to the highest standards and the proper role of government.
About me:
* 51 year native of Nevada, born in Las Vegas
* Married for 28 years, 2 children
* President of Fitzgibbons & Associates Insurance agency
* 2006 IAP Candidate for State Controller
* Member – IAP Executive Board
* Devout Christian
* Former Vice-Chair Nevada Concerned Citizens
* Member – John Birch Society
* Member – Society of Certified Insurance Counselors; Nevada Independent Insurance Agents Association; Better Business Bureau of Southern Nevada
* Church service – Various leadership positions – 28 yrs
* Member – Nevada Committee for Full Statehood
* Funding team – Ronald McDonald House of Las Vegas
* Volunteer leader – Boy Scouts of America - 5 yrs
* Youth Baseball, Basketball and Softball coach – 13 yrs
Position on issues:
* I am opposed to the continued war in Iraq.
* I am opposed to illegal immigration.
* I support completely securing our borders.
* I am opposed to any form of a “North American Union.”
* I support returning our country to a sound monetary system.
* I oppose the flawed financial policies of our federal government.
* I am opposed to Un-Constitutional and oppressive federal regulation.
* I have a solution to the medical care problems we face that is logical, innovative and takes the matter out of the reach of the federal government.
* I oppose the abuse of eminent domain.
* I support everyone’s right to worship God according to the dictates of their conscience.
* I support the right to keep and bear arms.
* I support measures recognizing marriage as being between a man and a woman only.
* I am opposed to abortion.
Can an Independent get elected?
Yes. If voters quit voting for the “lesser of two evils” and start voting their conscience. Anyone who votes for a candidate based on their chances of being elected, rather than a candidate who better represents their view of proper government has compromised themselves and their country, and is complicit in the improper government that results.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” -John Quincy Adams
If elected:
I will strictly adhere to the limitations on federal government outlined in the Constitution. I will not vote for any bill whose measures (in whole or in part) are not authorized by the Constitution. I will not vote for any bill which is proposed so late as to reasonably prohibit a complete reading and review of its contents in their entirety. I will propose legislation to return our federal government to the bounds of its constitutional authority.
Fitzgibbons for Congress – District 3
8301 Fawn Brook Ct., Las Vegas, NV 89149
Phone (702) 873-1315; Cell (702) 491-7555; fax (702) 873-4673
www.iapn.org/08CandidateFitzgibbons.htm
fitz111@cox.net
for U.S. Congress
District 3
Why I’m running:
I love this country, the U.S. Constitution and the sacrifices our Founding Fathers made to establish them. I have accepted the nomination of the Independent American Party in order to do my part for the cause of liberty. I am not doing this for money, prestige or power - only for the cause of liberty.
What I believe:
That men and women who are honest, wise and good should be sought for and upheld in public office. That elections should not be won or lost based on the amount of money spent on campaigns and I will not accept any campaign contributions whatsoever. That voting for a candidate should not be based on the number and look of election signs and I will not post any. That citizens should vote for the best candidate regardless of their party or perceived chances of being elected, otherwise they have compromised one of the great rights of liberty.
Money – the poison of politics:
Experience shows that money and politics are a poisonous mix. Countless are the number of politicians who have become corrupted by money. Rampant is the terrible influence on governmental decisions in pursuit of money both in reckless spending and wresting it from citizens thru heavy taxation. As rare as diamonds are the politicians who are not affected by money. The love of it truly is the root of all evil.
Candidates who raise large amounts of money from others should be viewed with the highest degree of suspicion. The tendency toward reciprocation is human nature. In some cases it literally becomes bribery. Almost any candidate who will prostitute themselves in a campaign will almost surely do the same when in office.
This being indisputable, it is obvious the proper course of action is to find politicians who will shun the influences of money – beginning in their political campaigns. This is a tangible measure of discipline and character long before the work of elected office takes place. It is my personal opinion that candidates for office should use only their own money to distribute their position on issues. That is what I have always done.
Character:
The genius of our nation is that it is a Republic – government based on laws (the highest of which is the U.S. Constitution) made by elected officials from their states or districts for the good and safety of society. It is not a democracy (which, in time, has always become “mob-rule”)! Elected officials should be those who are honest, wise and good – thus having the fortitude to stand up for true and correct principles of proper government regardless of the circumstances. Any signs of compromise in principle in a candidate will surely evolve into them becoming the object of greater manipulation once in office. Wisdom commends us to seek candidates who are steadfast and immovable in their determination to adhere to the highest standards and the proper role of government.
About me:
* 51 year native of Nevada, born in Las Vegas
* Married for 28 years, 2 children
* President of Fitzgibbons & Associates Insurance agency
* 2006 IAP Candidate for State Controller
* Member – IAP Executive Board
* Devout Christian
* Former Vice-Chair Nevada Concerned Citizens
* Member – John Birch Society
* Member – Society of Certified Insurance Counselors; Nevada Independent Insurance Agents Association; Better Business Bureau of Southern Nevada
* Church service – Various leadership positions – 28 yrs
* Member – Nevada Committee for Full Statehood
* Funding team – Ronald McDonald House of Las Vegas
* Volunteer leader – Boy Scouts of America - 5 yrs
* Youth Baseball, Basketball and Softball coach – 13 yrs
Position on issues:
* I am opposed to the continued war in Iraq.
* I am opposed to illegal immigration.
* I support completely securing our borders.
* I am opposed to any form of a “North American Union.”
* I support returning our country to a sound monetary system.
* I oppose the flawed financial policies of our federal government.
* I am opposed to Un-Constitutional and oppressive federal regulation.
* I have a solution to the medical care problems we face that is logical, innovative and takes the matter out of the reach of the federal government.
* I oppose the abuse of eminent domain.
* I support everyone’s right to worship God according to the dictates of their conscience.
* I support the right to keep and bear arms.
* I support measures recognizing marriage as being between a man and a woman only.
* I am opposed to abortion.
Can an Independent get elected?
Yes. If voters quit voting for the “lesser of two evils” and start voting their conscience. Anyone who votes for a candidate based on their chances of being elected, rather than a candidate who better represents their view of proper government has compromised themselves and their country, and is complicit in the improper government that results.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” -John Quincy Adams
If elected:
I will strictly adhere to the limitations on federal government outlined in the Constitution. I will not vote for any bill whose measures (in whole or in part) are not authorized by the Constitution. I will not vote for any bill which is proposed so late as to reasonably prohibit a complete reading and review of its contents in their entirety. I will propose legislation to return our federal government to the bounds of its constitutional authority.
Fitzgibbons for Congress – District 3
8301 Fawn Brook Ct., Las Vegas, NV 89149
Phone (702) 873-1315; Cell (702) 491-7555; fax (702) 873-4673
www.iapn.org/08CandidateFitzgibbons.htm
fitz111@cox.net
Proper Solution To Health Insurance Problem
Floyd Fitzgibbons
for U.S. Congress
As an insurance agent I have listened to all types of proposed solutions to the medical care problems in our country for long enough. Without exception, every proposed solution is inherently flawed for one reason or another. I am going to advance a real solution that is fair and realistic.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES
In the first place, let’s examine some truths which are beyond dispute. Under current conditions of civilization, people are free to choose what types of health habits to live by. Some choose to get regular physical checkups. Some brag that they never go to the doctor. Some choose unhealthy eating habits. Some adhere to rigid dietary restrictions. Some exercise regularly - others do not. It's the principle of free agency.
Then there are the conditions of mortality. Some are born with birth defects. Most are born appearing completely healthy. Disease strikes some early. For others it comes later in life - or not at all. Some participate voluntarily in risky activities. Some are more cautious. Serious accidents happen to some people - fortunately not very often.
Now what are our rights? If we intentionally make bad choices do we have the right to be sheltered from the consequences? What would it do to our individual character if we were? Would we ever have incentive to be responsible? Do we have the right to have food if we are physically able and refuse to work? How about clothing? Or housing? How about medical care?
HOW DID WE GET IN THIS MESS?
We have medical care problems in our country. Why? Some say there are too many citizens who have no health insurance. Some say that we should not be providing free medical care to illegal aliens. Some say the pharmaceutical companies charge too much for drugs. Some blame the lawyers; for others, it’s the insurance companies charging too much.
About 30 years ago, health insurance companies devised a plan to reduce expenses by agreeing with certain doctors to accept a set fee for each type of visit and procedure. The second component was to offer a reduced premium to businesses if they would enroll most or all of their employees in what would be named “group” health insurance. Employers bought into the plan because it tied employees to them and at the same time reduced costs for them in purchasing health insurance coverage for their employees. When doctors saw their patients leaving and going to the doctors who accepted their health insurance, more doctors caved in to the plan until now almost every doctor does. In this arrangement the health insurance companies gain the upper hand by dictating such low reimbursement levels for doctors that doctors are pressured into seeing more patients for less time in order to make ends meet. The patient gets the short end of that deal.
Many employees have come to expect that a good job comes with health insurance. They gladly give control of their medical care to their employer in what they mistakenly think is free insurance (because the employer pays for it). Then they complain if they have to pay more than $20 in a co-pay for a doctor visit or a $500 deductible for a hospital stay.
While employers feel pressure to purchase health insurance for employees in order to attract employees, they also want to reduce costs. It is the nature of business to keep overhead low. So it becomes a balancing act between attracting and keeping employees with a good benefit plan while trying to remain profitable against competition. Health insurance companies also compete - against each other. So in order to reduce premiums they go back to the doctors and tried to negotiate even lower reimbursement costs. Or they try to lower their overhead costs by reducing staff which causes service to suffer (ever been on hold for two hours trying to speak to someone in the insurance company’s claim department?).
Because the basic premise of how we currently obtain medical care is flawed, no one in this crazy equation can be happy. And when people start to cry “foul” government is more than willing to come to the rescue . . . and take control! Once government starts dictating the rules under the force of law, it's their way or the highway - and in many cases there will be no highway!
Thus, most presidential candidates encourage some form of “universal” medical care. Besides being un-Constitutional, nationalizing it will result in loss of choice, higher costs or taxes, rationed care, delays in receiving treatment, government mandates – in short less freedom. So, before we take a step in the direction from which there is virtually no return, let's take a hard look at the real problem and the real solution.
THE SOLUTION
We are told that 45 million people in our country are uninsured - or have not purchased health insurance. Assuming 45 million is an accurate number, how many of those could buy insurance but won’t? Currently if they get sick or injured they get treated at a hospital emergency room at the expense of you and I. What's fair about that? Then there are those who would like to buy health insurance but can't either because they cannot afford it or they are declined for individual coverage because of their health conditions.
So what is the solution? True insurance. Generally what we have now is not true insurance. You can't buy a life insurance policy on someone after they've died. Yet we expect to purchase health insurance after we've got health problems.
If your medical coverage comes through a group plan purchased by your employer, comparatively speaking very little underwriting or actuarial work went into determining how much premium to charge you in particular. That's because insurance companies by government mandate are forced to cover people who are already burdened with expensive health conditions. As such, the consideration is not so much to underwrite people individually but to have them subsidize the expenses of the entire pool of insureds. Insurance companies are not in business to lose money so they charge sufficient money to cover their claims expenses, overhead, and profit for the next 12 months or so. The masses of people simply trade dollars with the insurance company. We need to put the “insurance” back in health insurance.
Let's look at the way life insurance is bought and sold. An individual decides to take responsibility and makes plans to address the financial consequences of his/her eventual certain death. Remember death is certain - bad health is not, and yet we seem to have more trouble “insuring” health than life! Then he determines how much he wants the insurance company to pay out at the time of his death (let’s say $2,000,000 for example). He then finds out the premium/cost. Most whole life insurance policies have a premium that remains the same throughout the individual’s entire life. He will then have to answer many questions about his past and current health conditions, allow medical records to be reviewed and likely submit to blood, urine and other diagnostic tests. Once this is done and accepted by the insurance company the life insurance policy is issued. As long as he pays the premiums the insurance company is obligated to pay his beneficiary(s) $2 million dollars at his death whether it comes in six months or 60 years.
If we did a similar thing with health insurance the issues we’re now having in our country would largely go away. Responsible people would purchase a true health insurance policy on themselves and immediate family members. They would purchase it while still healthy and the earlier in life they bought it the lower the monthly insurance premiums would be. They would purchase a policy with a lifetime limit of their choosing – one, two, three, or more million dollars for example. Whatever limit they chose would be the most the insurance company would have to pay out during their lifetime. They could go to any doctor they wanted. As long as they made their premium payments, the policy would remain in force. This is called “guaranteed renewable/non-cancellable.” When they incurred costs for medical care, the insurance company would pay the claims out of the remaining limit of their insurance policy. Further, the policy could be a combined Health/Life policy – paying any unused benefit to the insured’s beneficiaries at death.
As a side note - dental and vision care fall into the category of not being insurance risks. Expecting an insurance company to pay for dental care or purchase a new pair of eyeglasses every year is just begging for higher costs. Such things are not true insurance – they are generally expected costs, not costs of chance. It is to trade dollars with insurance companies – and believe me insurance companies are not going to lose that game.
In order to insure children born with birth defects or diseases and not penalize parents of such children with increased premium costs through no fault of their own, the first of two requirements would regulate insurance companies. Remember, since there is no Constitutional authority for the Federal government to be involved in insurance, the states or individuals retain these powers. There are already Departments of Insurance regulating insurance companies in each state. The first is that insurance companies would have to insure all children of insured parents without a premium surcharge or underwriting. It would be an automatic open enrollment period when children are born. Since such births are random and rare, the actuaries would have to take such factors into consideration.
Can we do this overnight? For those that are fairly healthy the answer is an undeniable yes! I'm 51 years old and purchased an individual health savings account type policy last year for a monthly premium of $185.
For those who are not healthy accommodations will need to be made until the mess is cleared up. A second regulation permitted by the Department of Insurance in each state would require each health insurance company operating in their state to insure unhealthy people with a surcharge on premium (life insurance companies do the same thing already). A similar mechanism (assigned risk) is in place in each state mandating automobile insurance and workers compensation insurance. Those who cannot find coverage through the normal marketplace, can purchase it through the assigned risk pool. Each health insurance company would insure high risk individuals through a fair and equitable assignment or distribution to each company.
EVERYONE WINS!
By making health insurance truly insurance again we can keep the federal government out of it, give individuals the freedom to choose their own doctor and how much medical care they want to receive, take control of medical care away from employers and allow doctors to spend quality time with their patients. Everyone wins!
DISCLAIMER
The reality is - this real solution is not likely to be put into practice. A large number (majority?) of the citizens of this country have been trained to avoid taking individual responsibility and will ride the backs of others until both the rider and the ridden fall.
It is a true principle which is the motivating drive behind almost all human action - it is that all of us act based on the things we desire to obtain - the reward. If the reward of wise and prudent behavior is taken from those who are and given to those who are foolish and wasteful, the wise and prudent soon lose their motivation and reward ceases to exist for either. This is what happens in Socialism. Those who strive for excellence and hard work are cheated of their reward and those who tend towards mediocrity and idleness are temporarily rewarded for such behavior until the former cease to work only to see the fruits of their labors given to others. That is what is gravely wrong with any form of “Universal” health care or federal control of health insurance. Instead of placing men on equal grounds as it purports, it puts men on “unequal grounds” because the laborer is robbed of the reward he/she deserves. This not only doesn’t inspire people to prosper, it is a de-motivating scheme. Such socialism is more suited to a society like the old Soviet Union, which dictated and controlled nearly every aspect of its citizen’s lives. This is bondage. We claim America is a free country. Let’s act like it. This is liberty!
Floyd Fitzgibbons, CIC
Certified Insurance Counselor
President/Fitzgibbons & Associates
8301 Fawn Brook Ct., Las Vegas, NV 89149
Phone (702) 655-5160; fax (702) 873-4673
http://www.fitzgibbon.biz/
fitz111@cox.net
for U.S. Congress
As an insurance agent I have listened to all types of proposed solutions to the medical care problems in our country for long enough. Without exception, every proposed solution is inherently flawed for one reason or another. I am going to advance a real solution that is fair and realistic.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES
In the first place, let’s examine some truths which are beyond dispute. Under current conditions of civilization, people are free to choose what types of health habits to live by. Some choose to get regular physical checkups. Some brag that they never go to the doctor. Some choose unhealthy eating habits. Some adhere to rigid dietary restrictions. Some exercise regularly - others do not. It's the principle of free agency.
Then there are the conditions of mortality. Some are born with birth defects. Most are born appearing completely healthy. Disease strikes some early. For others it comes later in life - or not at all. Some participate voluntarily in risky activities. Some are more cautious. Serious accidents happen to some people - fortunately not very often.
Now what are our rights? If we intentionally make bad choices do we have the right to be sheltered from the consequences? What would it do to our individual character if we were? Would we ever have incentive to be responsible? Do we have the right to have food if we are physically able and refuse to work? How about clothing? Or housing? How about medical care?
HOW DID WE GET IN THIS MESS?
We have medical care problems in our country. Why? Some say there are too many citizens who have no health insurance. Some say that we should not be providing free medical care to illegal aliens. Some say the pharmaceutical companies charge too much for drugs. Some blame the lawyers; for others, it’s the insurance companies charging too much.
About 30 years ago, health insurance companies devised a plan to reduce expenses by agreeing with certain doctors to accept a set fee for each type of visit and procedure. The second component was to offer a reduced premium to businesses if they would enroll most or all of their employees in what would be named “group” health insurance. Employers bought into the plan because it tied employees to them and at the same time reduced costs for them in purchasing health insurance coverage for their employees. When doctors saw their patients leaving and going to the doctors who accepted their health insurance, more doctors caved in to the plan until now almost every doctor does. In this arrangement the health insurance companies gain the upper hand by dictating such low reimbursement levels for doctors that doctors are pressured into seeing more patients for less time in order to make ends meet. The patient gets the short end of that deal.
Many employees have come to expect that a good job comes with health insurance. They gladly give control of their medical care to their employer in what they mistakenly think is free insurance (because the employer pays for it). Then they complain if they have to pay more than $20 in a co-pay for a doctor visit or a $500 deductible for a hospital stay.
While employers feel pressure to purchase health insurance for employees in order to attract employees, they also want to reduce costs. It is the nature of business to keep overhead low. So it becomes a balancing act between attracting and keeping employees with a good benefit plan while trying to remain profitable against competition. Health insurance companies also compete - against each other. So in order to reduce premiums they go back to the doctors and tried to negotiate even lower reimbursement costs. Or they try to lower their overhead costs by reducing staff which causes service to suffer (ever been on hold for two hours trying to speak to someone in the insurance company’s claim department?).
Because the basic premise of how we currently obtain medical care is flawed, no one in this crazy equation can be happy. And when people start to cry “foul” government is more than willing to come to the rescue . . . and take control! Once government starts dictating the rules under the force of law, it's their way or the highway - and in many cases there will be no highway!
Thus, most presidential candidates encourage some form of “universal” medical care. Besides being un-Constitutional, nationalizing it will result in loss of choice, higher costs or taxes, rationed care, delays in receiving treatment, government mandates – in short less freedom. So, before we take a step in the direction from which there is virtually no return, let's take a hard look at the real problem and the real solution.
THE SOLUTION
We are told that 45 million people in our country are uninsured - or have not purchased health insurance. Assuming 45 million is an accurate number, how many of those could buy insurance but won’t? Currently if they get sick or injured they get treated at a hospital emergency room at the expense of you and I. What's fair about that? Then there are those who would like to buy health insurance but can't either because they cannot afford it or they are declined for individual coverage because of their health conditions.
So what is the solution? True insurance. Generally what we have now is not true insurance. You can't buy a life insurance policy on someone after they've died. Yet we expect to purchase health insurance after we've got health problems.
If your medical coverage comes through a group plan purchased by your employer, comparatively speaking very little underwriting or actuarial work went into determining how much premium to charge you in particular. That's because insurance companies by government mandate are forced to cover people who are already burdened with expensive health conditions. As such, the consideration is not so much to underwrite people individually but to have them subsidize the expenses of the entire pool of insureds. Insurance companies are not in business to lose money so they charge sufficient money to cover their claims expenses, overhead, and profit for the next 12 months or so. The masses of people simply trade dollars with the insurance company. We need to put the “insurance” back in health insurance.
Let's look at the way life insurance is bought and sold. An individual decides to take responsibility and makes plans to address the financial consequences of his/her eventual certain death. Remember death is certain - bad health is not, and yet we seem to have more trouble “insuring” health than life! Then he determines how much he wants the insurance company to pay out at the time of his death (let’s say $2,000,000 for example). He then finds out the premium/cost. Most whole life insurance policies have a premium that remains the same throughout the individual’s entire life. He will then have to answer many questions about his past and current health conditions, allow medical records to be reviewed and likely submit to blood, urine and other diagnostic tests. Once this is done and accepted by the insurance company the life insurance policy is issued. As long as he pays the premiums the insurance company is obligated to pay his beneficiary(s) $2 million dollars at his death whether it comes in six months or 60 years.
If we did a similar thing with health insurance the issues we’re now having in our country would largely go away. Responsible people would purchase a true health insurance policy on themselves and immediate family members. They would purchase it while still healthy and the earlier in life they bought it the lower the monthly insurance premiums would be. They would purchase a policy with a lifetime limit of their choosing – one, two, three, or more million dollars for example. Whatever limit they chose would be the most the insurance company would have to pay out during their lifetime. They could go to any doctor they wanted. As long as they made their premium payments, the policy would remain in force. This is called “guaranteed renewable/non-cancellable.” When they incurred costs for medical care, the insurance company would pay the claims out of the remaining limit of their insurance policy. Further, the policy could be a combined Health/Life policy – paying any unused benefit to the insured’s beneficiaries at death.
As a side note - dental and vision care fall into the category of not being insurance risks. Expecting an insurance company to pay for dental care or purchase a new pair of eyeglasses every year is just begging for higher costs. Such things are not true insurance – they are generally expected costs, not costs of chance. It is to trade dollars with insurance companies – and believe me insurance companies are not going to lose that game.
In order to insure children born with birth defects or diseases and not penalize parents of such children with increased premium costs through no fault of their own, the first of two requirements would regulate insurance companies. Remember, since there is no Constitutional authority for the Federal government to be involved in insurance, the states or individuals retain these powers. There are already Departments of Insurance regulating insurance companies in each state. The first is that insurance companies would have to insure all children of insured parents without a premium surcharge or underwriting. It would be an automatic open enrollment period when children are born. Since such births are random and rare, the actuaries would have to take such factors into consideration.
Can we do this overnight? For those that are fairly healthy the answer is an undeniable yes! I'm 51 years old and purchased an individual health savings account type policy last year for a monthly premium of $185.
For those who are not healthy accommodations will need to be made until the mess is cleared up. A second regulation permitted by the Department of Insurance in each state would require each health insurance company operating in their state to insure unhealthy people with a surcharge on premium (life insurance companies do the same thing already). A similar mechanism (assigned risk) is in place in each state mandating automobile insurance and workers compensation insurance. Those who cannot find coverage through the normal marketplace, can purchase it through the assigned risk pool. Each health insurance company would insure high risk individuals through a fair and equitable assignment or distribution to each company.
EVERYONE WINS!
By making health insurance truly insurance again we can keep the federal government out of it, give individuals the freedom to choose their own doctor and how much medical care they want to receive, take control of medical care away from employers and allow doctors to spend quality time with their patients. Everyone wins!
DISCLAIMER
The reality is - this real solution is not likely to be put into practice. A large number (majority?) of the citizens of this country have been trained to avoid taking individual responsibility and will ride the backs of others until both the rider and the ridden fall.
It is a true principle which is the motivating drive behind almost all human action - it is that all of us act based on the things we desire to obtain - the reward. If the reward of wise and prudent behavior is taken from those who are and given to those who are foolish and wasteful, the wise and prudent soon lose their motivation and reward ceases to exist for either. This is what happens in Socialism. Those who strive for excellence and hard work are cheated of their reward and those who tend towards mediocrity and idleness are temporarily rewarded for such behavior until the former cease to work only to see the fruits of their labors given to others. That is what is gravely wrong with any form of “Universal” health care or federal control of health insurance. Instead of placing men on equal grounds as it purports, it puts men on “unequal grounds” because the laborer is robbed of the reward he/she deserves. This not only doesn’t inspire people to prosper, it is a de-motivating scheme. Such socialism is more suited to a society like the old Soviet Union, which dictated and controlled nearly every aspect of its citizen’s lives. This is bondage. We claim America is a free country. Let’s act like it. This is liberty!
Floyd Fitzgibbons, CIC
Certified Insurance Counselor
President/Fitzgibbons & Associates
8301 Fawn Brook Ct., Las Vegas, NV 89149
Phone (702) 655-5160; fax (702) 873-4673
http://www.fitzgibbon.biz/
fitz111@cox.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
