My wife and I are expecting our first child. As you can imagine, I am excited (and a little nervous) to welcome a new member of our family into our lives.
In addition to the obvious things new parents do to prepare — painting the baby room, buying a car seat — there are more practical, financial considerations to take into account as well.
At the top of the list is medical coverage. We want to make sure our new child has the best health care possible. These days, that can cost a pretty penny.
With a child on the way, the last thing I can afford is unnecessary legislation that will raise costs for families like mine. Recently, I read about a proposal being pursued by some lawmakers that would require all Hoosiers to see a doctor when they need cold or allergy medicines containing the decongestant pseudoephedrine. It goes without saying that these Indiana leaders are trying to do what’s right. I commend them for trying to address methamphetamine production and abuse in our state.
But in my opinion, the prescription mandate approach will do more harm than good. Not only will it raise health-care costs for decent citizens, it will also lead to lower paychecks for employees forced to take time off work to see their doctor. I also find it dubious to claim that such a law would impact the meth problem since the vast majority of the American meth is imported from Mexico.
It’s essential that we make progress against meth, but we can do so without hurting hard-working families.