GUEST OPINION: Why would they want to stifle competition?

There is a movement mostly among Democrats to continue to stifle competition in the health insurance market. This started here in the state about 10 years ago when then-Senator Shaheen pushed through a bill which effectively (and predictably) drove all but two health insurers out of the state. The effect of this was to force the insurance rates in the healthiest state in the country to be second highest behind New Jersey.

Last year we in the Legislature passed and the governor signed a bill called Senate Bill 110, which is intended to correct this. This year several insurance companies have re-entered the group insurance market here in New Hampshire offering some new competitive plans.

Several Democratic candidates are running on the platform of decimating this new competition.

Why would they want to eliminate competition and drive the cost of health insurance even higher? The only answer I see is that they wish to install a socialist medicine program here. If the cost of insurance is so high that no one can afford it they must think the public will demand a government paid system.

The Democrats wrote in their platform that they want “a right to health care.” They even go so far as to “challenge the New Hampshire Legislature to design a solution for the comprehensive coverage of all citizens by 2005.” Sounds just like socialized medicine to me and, of course, a flourishing free-market health insurance system would not encourage voters to demand socialism. Capitalism and free markets don’t go well with socialism.

Of course they can’t call it socialized medicine — that has a stigma attached just as “liberal” does. They shy away from such labels. They like to call me a conservative, thinking it is a bad thing and I proudly admit to being a conservative.

Republican N.H. Sen. Robert Boyce represents District 4.