
每年秋天,数百万美国人都要经历同一场令人沮丧的仪式:开放注册期。保险公司的标志面熟得很,人力资源部的邮件依旧坚称公司“致力于提供有竞争力的福利”。随后,标价冲击随之而来。展望 2027 年,雇主计划成本预计将跃升 9.5%,推高人均成本突破 1.9 万美元。在《平价医疗法案》市场上,保险公司提议的保费中位数涨幅达 15%。
Every fall, millions of Americans sit down for the same grim ritual: open enrollment. The insurance logos are familiar, and the email from HR still insists the company is “committed to offering competitive benefits.”Then the sticker shock sets in. Heading into 2027, employer plan costs are projected to jump 9.5 percent, pushing the average past $19,000 per worker. On the Affordable Care Act marketplaces, insurers have proposed a median premium hike of 15 percent.
而对于数百万自行购买保险的人来说,账根本算不通了。过去一年,个人市场参保人数暴跌逾 450 万——从 2025 年的 2520 万骤降至 2026 年中旬的 2050 万,跌幅 18%,系十年来最陡峭的降幅。其主因是新冠疫情期间的增强税收抵免到期,以及近期联邦政策的转向。当保费飙升、数百万人失去保障时,很容易把责任推给保险公司、医院垄断或药企。
And for millions buying their own coverage, the math has stopped working altogether. Over the last year, individual market enrollment plunged by more than 4.5 million people — dropping 18 percent from 25.2 million in 2025 to 20.5 million in mid-2026. Driven by the expiration of COVID-era enhanced tax credits and recent federal policy shifts, it is the steepest drop in a decade. When premiums spike and millions lose coverage, it is easy to blame insurers, hospital monopolies or drugmakers.
它们确实难辞其咎。但更深层的失败是结构性的:我们的健康保险模式是医疗手段尚不奏效那个时代的遗物。将健康保险与就业挂钩、以税前收入支付,是二战工资管制的意外副产品。那时医疗手段原始,除去接骨、接生,进医院大多是去等死。因有效干预罕见,通过职场汇集风险以覆盖偶尔的住院开支原本说得通。
They bear plenty of responsibility. But the deeper failure is structural: Our health insurance model is an artifact of an era when medicine didn't actually work very well. Tying health insurance to employment and paying for it with pre-tax dollars is an accidental byproduct of World War II wage controls. Back then, medical care was rudimentary. Outside of setting a bone or delivering a baby, you mostly went to the hospital to die. Because effective interventions were rare, pooling risk through the workplace to cover the occasional hospital stay made sense.
八十年后,医疗手段已极为有效。我们拥有靶向生物制剂、基因疗法,以及 GLP-1 类等革命性药物,从根本上改变了慢性病的病程轨迹。数百万人能够、也应该终身服用这些疗法以维持健康。问题在于,你无法用一个为罕见、不可预测意外而设计的保险机制,为半数人口终身昂贵的维持性疗法提供资金。
Eighty years later, medicine works remarkably well. We have targeted biologics, gene therapies, and revolutionary drugs like GLP-1s that fundamentally alter the trajectory of chronic disease. Millions of people can, and should, take these therapies for a lifetime to stay healthy. The catch is you cannot finance a lifetime of expensive maintenance therapies for half the population through an insurance mechanism built for rare, unpredictable accidents.
保险的运作原理是:大量人群每月缴纳少量保费,以保障极少数倒霉者免遭灾难性打击。当几乎所有人都需要持续医疗才能维持健康时,传统的风险池机制就会失效。随着新疗法涌现和医疗服务提供商整合加剧,体系不堪重负,雇主和保险公司只能祭出惯用手段:将成本转嫁给员工。免赔额攀升至极高水平,导致数百万美国人名义上有保险,却因负担不起账单而不敢就医。解决这一问题需要结构性改革。我们必须摒弃过时的雇主资助模式,围绕两大支柱重构医疗融资体系。
Insurance works when a large group pays a little each month to protect against a catastrophe that hits an unlucky few. When almost everyone needs ongoing care to stay healthy, the traditional risk pool breaks. As the system buckles under the weight of new treatments and provider consolidation, employers and insurers fall back on their only playbook: shifting costs onto workers. Deductibles climb so high that millions of Americans are insured on paper, yet avoid the doctor because they cannot afford the bill. Fixing this demands structural reform. We must retire our obsolete employer-sponsored model and rebuild healthcare financing around two distinct pillars.
首先,实施全民灾难性保障。保险应回归保险本位。每位美国人都应拥有基础灾难性保障——与就业脱钩——以保护家庭免受癌症确诊、大型手术、重症监护病房住院或百万美元基因疗法带来的财务毁灭。
First, we implement universal catastrophic protection. Insurance should go back to being actual insurance. Every American should have baseline catastrophic coverage — detached from employment — that protects families from the financial ruin of a cancer diagnosis, a major surgery, an intensive care unit stay, or a million-dollar gene therapy.
其次,建立常规和预防性护理的透明现金市场。对于日常医疗——初级保健、诊断和常规维持性药物——我们应移除保险中介。将可预测的医疗服务通过第三方支付方渠道流转,会增加巨额行政冗余,并将真实价格隐藏在不透明的保险公司与提供商谈判背后。当提供商和药企必须直接争夺消费者的现金支出时,价格会迅速下降。
Second, we need a transparent cash market for routine and preventive care. For everyday medicine — primary care, diagnostics and routine maintenance medications — we should remove the insurance middleman. Routing predictable care through third-party payers adds massive administrative bloat while hiding real prices behind opaque insurer-provider negotiations. When providers and drugmakers have to compete directly for consumer dollars, prices fall fast.
看看GLP-1类药物发生了什么。当保险公司争相限制覆盖范围、雇主因成本高企而退缩时,一个面向消费者的直接现金市场应运而生。过去两年,为争夺自费患者的激烈竞争,已将GLP-1治疗价格从每月1500美元以上压低至150美元左右的起步价。这就是激励机制对齐后的结果。透明竞争取代官僚式配给,医疗服务真正变得负担得起。
Look at what has happened with GLP-1s. While insurers scrambled to restrict coverage and employers balked at the cost, a direct-to-consumer cash market emerged. Over the last two years, fierce competition for cash-paying patients has driven the price of GLP-1 treatments down from more than $1,500 a month to starting prices around $150 a month. That is what happens when incentives align. Transparent competition replaces bureaucratic rationing, and care actually becomes affordable.
为加速这一转型,决策者应停止将数千亿美元的税前补贴专门投入臃肿的、由雇主选择的计划。相反,税收优惠应直接给予个人,以便他们将可携带的灾难性保险与可用于常规、预防性现金支付医疗的灵活账户相结合。近期,立法者还应规定,每当患者为一项费用不超过保险公司协商价格的服务支付现金时,该支出必须计入其年度免赔额。
To accelerate this transition, policymakers should stop funneling hundreds of billions of dollars in pre-tax subsidies exclusively into bloated, employer-chosen plans. Instead, tax advantages should go directly to individuals to pair portable catastrophic coverage with flexible accounts they can spend on routine, preventive cash-pay care. In the near term, lawmakers should also mandate that whenever a patient pays cash for a service at or below their insurer's negotiated rate, that spending must count toward their annual deductible.
我们正试图用20世纪中叶的融资模式来支付21世纪的医学奇迹。随着450万美国人脱离个人保险市场,雇主成本飙升至每名员工1.9万美元,基础的裂缝已无法忽视。是时候为可能使我们破产的医疗灾难建立普遍保障,并为让我们保持健康的日常医疗开放透明的现金市场。迈克尔·博塔是一名医疗经济学家,也是塞萨米的联合创始人。
We are trying to pay for 21st-century medical miracles with a mid-20th-century financing model. As 4.5 million Americans fall off the individual marketplaces and employer costs surge past $19,000 per worker, the cracks in the foundation are impossible to ignore. It is time to build universal protection for the medical catastrophes that could bankrupt us, and unleash transparent cash markets for the everyday care that keeps us healthy. Michael Botta is a healthcare economist and co-founder of Sesame.