According to an article in The State News (“Numbers show most students paying new MSU health plan out-of-pocket” SN 3/23), as of this past fall semester, beginning with the freshman class, each and every enrolled student must purchase health insurance.

Simon’s demand of current students is especially unreasonable with the consideration that some were not made aware of the requirement prior to matriculation. As a result, these freshmen were the recipients of a deceptive marketing ploy. Of course, noncompliant students are charged a sum of $1,505 for one year’s worth of coverage by the university.

Let me reiterate: there is not an option here. The enacted policy requires students to purchase insurance or pay the price and be insured based on their affiliation with the university.

Unintended consequences often follow drastic mandates. Unfortunately for linguistics freshman Madelain Thomas, she learned of the fee the hard way. The MSU Student Accounts office assessed her account as an apparently “irrevocable sum” for not having insurance. The catch? Thomas was insured already.

Who gave the go-ahead for this authoritative ruling, you ask? The culprit: President Simon. Because, in her view, only 14 percent of students are affected by the mandate, and that is reason enough to keep the tax. A top-down, authoritative approach to administrative governance has taken center stage, and the audience is far from satisfied.

One MSU Trustee has come forward. Melanie Foster, current vice chairperson of the MSU Board of Trustees who seeks re-election, has condemned the entire ordeal. In a letter to The State News (“Insurance subject to board review” 3-11), she proclaims “This policy was presented to the board as an informational item and not discussed in public session or voted on by the board.”

Continuing, Foster “urge(s) President Lou Anna K. Simon and her senior administration … to rescind this policy.”

To date, fellow GOP colleagues – Brian Breslin and Mitch Lyons – and all five Democrats have not commented on the pressing matter.

Individual students ought to have the right to remain uninsured. Much like similar private services, health insurance is not a right, but rather, a privilege. The important distinction is evident.

That is not to say the status quo situation is perfect. In fact, key reform measures are necessary.

Namely, Congress ought to pass a law granting private insurers the ability to offer their services across state lines. This would yield a two-pronged outcome: increased options for consumers and lowered costs. Firms will have to think of innovative ways to compete for viability in the marketplace as the field of competitors expands.

A broader market for any good or service tends to bring about a bevy of alternatives. Prices inevitably drop – in economic language, the equilibrium price will fall – due to heightened competition. Left unregulated by well-meaning yet harmful government policies, the free enterprise system functions marvelously.

Interestingly, aside from President Barack Obama’s chances at a second term hanging in the balance, the looming decision by the U.S. Supreme Court with regard to the chief executive’s signature legislative achievement could shed light on our campus conundrum.

The justices are in the process of deciding whether the Constitution contains a clause that grants the federal government the authority to require citizens, and perhaps noncitizens, to purchase a service. I cannot fathom a reasonable defense of such an interpretation. However — at least on grounds of relevancy for taxpayer-funded entities — let’s allow our highest court to make the call. The institution is partly financed by the taxpaying public, after all.

First and foremost as an institute of higher learning, academic matters ought to be the focus of the university administration. What message does an authoritarian-in-disguise barking orders from atop the proverbial ivory tower send to today’s young scholars? That the elite few know what is best for us? That we are incapable of making decisions on our own? One’s insurance options firmly belong to oneself – and no one else.

Show your support of individual liberty by composing an email to Simon expressing the inherent detriments with “Simon Care.”

Point out the financial flaws, noting that it is unjust to levy an additional — and absurd — tax on students solely because of their insurance preference. Freedom for all, even those who elect to remain uninsured, is an incredibly American premise after all.

You are free to send written correspondence and make phone calls as well. Fight for what is right.

Nick Kowalski is a guest columnist at The State News and a political theory senior. Reach him at kowal112@msu.edu.