Since I'd like to retire before age 65, I am concerned about health care during those years before medicare kicks in. DW and I have health conditions that are not serious but don't fit the underwriting standards of insurance companies. (Another problem is not being entirely candid about medical problems on the application, because although you may be accepted, you'll have a claim denial if they find it later.) Why doesn't the government underwrite the care of chronically ill patients, who consume a lot of health care dollars? I believe this is the case now for everyone with end stage renal failure (dialysis) regardless of age. This would help insurance companies underwrite risk better and keep their costs down. The quid pro quo would be that the companies could not "cherry pick" customers. All they could be is charge more by age, which seems fair. The govt. should assign a case manager to every seriously chronically ill patient to see that these people had the most appropriate, but not necessarily the most expensive, case available. And why, as a society, do we require that people who are obviously dying be treated with expensive drugs and interventions? It reflects our unwillingness to face death and the greed of the health insurance injury and trial lawyers. (think John Edwards, the cerebral palsy king).