(FORTUNE Magazine) – Our own health insurance plan is much less ambitious than Mike Dukakis's plan, and yet in a way ours is more radical. It is definitely outside the political mainstream, at least the stream we keep seeing on the talk shows. Our plan is endorsed by no Republican, Democratic, or fascist politician known to this keyboarder, and yet it is simplicity itself. The Keeping Up plan: Do nothing about health insurance. Mike's plan, already implemented in Massachusetts, would definitely get a lift in coming months if the man gains in excess of 269 electoral votes, so it cannot be totally ignored (unlike our own plan). The Dukakisites start out by saying we have a big, big problem in that 37 million Americans now lack health insurance. The plot is to solve this problem by going after employers who do not now offer health insurance and telling them to shape up. Judging from various vibes out of the campaign org, certain small employers might be exempted from this requirement, and it is also unclear just what the law would say about coverage of part-time workers. Still, the party line is that about 22 million of the 37 million would be instantly covered under the Dukakis plan; and in a manner not yet specified -- details await a task force to be assembled after the election -- the other 15 million would also somehow get taken care of lickety-split.

A fact never focused on in campaign literature is that the 180 million or so Americans covered by private health insurance did not get into this situation as a result of any politician's plans. They got the coverage as a result of market forces. Or, for those inclined to squirm when that phrase is invoked, they got it because the companies and workers involved collectively judged health insurance to be a better buy than alternative forms of compensation -- more pay, for example, or higher pension benefits, or more paid vacation.

The companies currently not offering health insurance have obviously made a different judgment. We assume that in the median case, the enterprise reaching this judgment is small and struggling and doesn't pay too well. But health insurance costs just as much for its employees as for IBM's, which means that insurance for the former would necessarily represent a bigger chunk of the compensation package. Mandatory health insurance for low-paying companies is a rather regressive tax. These details seem not to bother numerous commentators on Mike's plan, who keep not noticing that it's the employees who ultimately bear the cost of the plan. The companies, we happen to know, will not just roll over and serve up a free lunch. If hit by a bill for health insurance -- which would average maybe $1,300 per year per employee -- they will respond either by cutting back on other forms of compensation or by cutting back on employment. Luckily, we know of a health insurance plan not presenting these problems.