Why There Will Be No Universal Health Coverage in the U.S.

As California goes, so will go the nation. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's plan to arrange medical insurance for nearly all Californians went down in flames yesterday by a 10-1 vote of the state Senate Health Committee. The proposal would have required people to hold private insurance and would have subsidized the premiums for those who could not afford them. Of the 50 million Americans lacking health insurance, 10% live in California.

The plan was simply too expensive. With the state already facing a $14.5 billion shortfall, senators were reluctant to take on a new financial commitment with incalculable risk. The Governor's proposal was patterned after legislation passed 22 months ago in Massachusetts, the first state to mandate universal coverage. That program is now staggering under $400 million in cost overruns and will likely require a new infusion of taxpayer money, as more employers shed coverage benefits and premium costs continue to outpace inflation.

The defeat bodes ill for national efforts to overhaul the country's healthcare system. The three remaining Democratic presidential candidates--Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards--all have proposed similar programs aimed at expanding private insurance. Obama's, it must be noted, omits the dreaded individual mandate, which in California would have forced people to buy policies with deductibles as high as $2,500, leaving them exposed to potentially ruinous out-of-pocket costs.

Let's face it. With our sedentary lifestyles, widespread drug dependencies, and toxic diets, we Americans are too demanding of health care, the cost of which runs to one-sixth of national GDP every year. Many of the uninsured choose to be that way because they are healthy and tired of paying for the rest of us. Making them pay is an option that California has rejected.