There should be a warning sign posted for those nearing Baby Boomer age — do not proceed without health insurance.

Easier said than done.
Ensuring that all Americans have access to affordable healthcare coverage is difficult enough. It’s even more so for those who fall in the gap — they don’t qualify for employer-based or government plans, and must buy individual coverage on the open market.
Among them are a key constituency of the AARP — those between the ages of 50 and 64, too young for Medicare but old enough to need quality healthcare. A new AARP report, based on Census data, showed that more than 1 in 10 Hawaiçi residents between those ages — about 26,700 people — went without health insurance in 2007. And that’s before the economic meltdown and binge of layoffs. It’s a gap that reflects a growing national trend for that age group, the AARP says. And it’s a gap that effective healthcare reform — thankfully, now a top priority among Washington policymakers — must fill.
The uninsured who fall within that age range have it tough, especially if they’ve been laid off and lose their employer-sponsored health plan. They’re more prone to health problems, for one; seven in 10 of these Americans have at least one illness, according to the AARP. Individual insurance, already fearfully expensive, often charges even more for — or simply denies — those with pre-existing health conditions. And Baby Boomers tend to have a more difficult time than younger people finding a job with health benefits.
For all these reasons, ensuring that they can get affordable coverage is critical. But it won’t be easy, or cheap. AARP wants to ban insurers from denying coverage and charging higher rates based on age or health status; Congress is considering comparable legislation related to pre-existing conditions.
AARP also wants more spending on subsidies to keep individual costs at no more than 10 percent of income.
Experts agree the best way to expand coverage to most of the uninsured, at an estimated cost of $120 billion per year, is to make it less expensive overall.
Health-industry associations, wary of government mandates, have pledged to reduce costs voluntarily by $2 trillion over the next decade. This could be an important step toward reducing unchecked wasteful spending. They should be held to their promise.
Other options are more controversial but need to be explored, including raising money by limiting, but not eliminating, the tax deduction for employer-provided health insurance.
It’s hoped the end result will mean more people with decent coverage, distributed more efficiently and with less waste. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promises legislation by July 31.
That’s none too soon. Ensuring reasonable access to healthcare for those who need it remains a goal yet to be reached.