Whoopsie! I made a misake!!! That is extremely rare.
HOWEVER… there is a contradiction here.. if the premiums are lower.. then more people can afford insurance if they want it. So, why don't YOU explain why more people would be uninsured if the insurance premiums are lower?
I will explain it. I have spent my entire career working in health insurance.
If you don't have a mandate then healthy people won't buy it. People will just go without health insurance and then use the ER when they get sick and never pay the bill. Those costs are going to get shifted to tax payers instead. The cost of uncompensated care to hospitals was enormous in Massachusetts and was the primary reason for RomneyCare. Romney went around for months bashing the "freeloaders" who used the system but never paid anything into it. RomneyCare and ObamaCare ensured that everybody paid something even if it was just a fine.
The Republican plan will make health insurance optional but if you have a lapse in coverage you will pay a higher premium when you do sign up. This means that many people who get sick and are most vulnerable won't be able to afford it.
This is actually not a new idea. Medicare works this way. You can refuse Medicare Part B when you turn 65. If you sign up later you pay a penalty every month via a much higher premium that is based on how long it has been since you turned 65. Some people do this and they ALWAYS regret it. They are usually stuck paying this high premium when their income becomes fixed because they are no longer working and when their health starts to decline due to age. There is one key difference though. Most people do enroll in Part B when they turn age 65 but that premium is deducted automatically from their Social Security check. The person never has to make a choice between buying groceries (or an iPhone) and paying for their health insurance. It also works this way for Medicare Part A for certain legal immigrants.
