Politicians and policy geeks (like me) talk and write about health care policy as if an ultimate goal is to maximize the number of people who have insurance coverage. But the Cato Institute's Michael F. Cannon says that we should take another path: reject the call for universal coverage.

Cannon isn't just saying that government should not run the health care system, along the lines of Canada or Great Britain. He wants us to confront the fact--and embrace it while we're at it--that not everyone will have insurance. On this Independence Day, it's important to point to his central theme: It's a matter of liberty.

Here are his comments:

Politicians and policy wonks across the political spectrum assume that the goal of health care reform is to achieve "universal coverage," where everyone has health insurance, one way or another.

I think that's a faulty assumption.

To challenge that view, I have launched the Anti-Universal Coverage Club. The club is nothing more than an informal list of people who think policymakers should not make "universal coverage" their guiding principle. (It should also serve as useful market research, revealing just how many such people exist.)

Here's the basic philosophy:

1. Health policy should focus on making health care of ever-increasing quality available to an ever-increasing number of people.

2. To achieve "universal coverage" would require either having the government provide health insurance to everyone or forcing everyone to buy it. Government provision is undesirable, because government generally does a poor job of improving quality or affordability. Forcing people to get insurance would lead to a worse health-care system for everyone, because it would necessitate so much more government intervention.

3. In a free society, people should have the right to refuse health insurance.

4. If governments must subsidize, they should be free to experiment with cash subsidies, vouchers, insurance coverage, public clinics & hospitals, uncompensated care payments, and tax exemptions, rather than be forced by a policy of "universal coverage" to subsidize people via "insurance."

Early members of the Anti-Universal Coverage Club include National Review and Andrew Sullivan.

The more prominent thinkers who join, the easier it will be to steer at least one part of the political spectrum in the right direction.

To join, post something to your blog or email me here. Also, please forward items from other like-minded thinkers.