Insurance deregulation....

[KFC911]

Probably gonna end up in PARF

I have trouble believing that the deregulation of the insurance industry (allowing them to cross state lines) is being considered after what has happened in banking since the mid-80s . It will not turn out as the panacea that some will suggest imo.

Discuss....

[Scott R]

It's a fair point. Look at Wells Fargo.

[Tervuren]

It *will* be better than the ACA. Unfortunately, the ACA may wreck things before we get anything else going.

I do not see anything being solvable given what happened in 2010. If by grace a new administration can sort things out it will be a miracle.

[Arizona_928]

Can't be worse then how it was before...

[legion]

Illinois passed a law some time ago making it illegal to sell milk more than 50 miles from the dairy. It was ostensibly to promote "freshness" and "health". The real reason was to cut Wisconsin mega-dairies out of the Illinois market. During the short time the law was in effect, milk prices skyrocketed. The Supreme Court rightly ruled that the law was a barrier to interstate commerce and struck it down. Milk prices came back down.

The patchwork of state laws on health insurance prevent interstate commerce of this good. The effect has been carving out territories for various insurance companies without the threat of too much competition. These companies have used state legislatures to do what they can't do legally. Striking down these unconstitutional laws may not solve all problems, but it will solve some. Further, it is a remedy already spelled out in our Constitution, rather than requiring individuals to buy a product they may not want or need.

[wdfifteen]

The ACA (Obama Care) already permits states to make agreements (compacts) to allow sales across state lines within the compact. Not many, if any, insurance companies are taking them up on it, but a bunch more states are lined up to accept the regulations of other states.
Whether repealing the McCarran-Ferguson Act, which grants states the right to regulate health plans within their borders, would be good or bad depends on what happens afterwards. Will insurance be completely deregulated, or will every state have to conform to the regulations of any other state, or will the federal government impose its own regulations? I'm sure insurance companies would prefer the first option. If we got the second option, then, like credit card companies, insurance companies would locate in Delaware or North Dakota or some state with a small legislature that can be easily controlled, and basically write their own regulations. If the feds write the regulations, we get the same sort of thing we have with banking regs.

[Tobra]

Originally Posted by AZ_porschekid

Can't be worse then how it was before...

Sure it could.

Insurance companies are getting out of Obamacare because they are losing their shirts. It has put federal regulations on health insurance that appear to be designed to finish off what we have now, make it too expensive to continue and force us into nationalized health insurance.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by Tobra

Sure it could.

Insurance companies are getting out of Obamacare because they are losing their shirts. It has put federal regulations on health insurance that appear to be designed to finish off what we have now, make it too expensive to continue and force us into nationalized health insurance.

I do not believe that BCBS-NC loses money either in the private sector or under the ACA, and they virtually have a monopoly already. Also do not undersrand why a BCBS case worker was in the middle of the decision making when my elderly aunt (88) was essentially sent home from the hospital against her doctor's wishes a year ago . I do NOT trust BCBS any more than I would trust Wells Fargo et al. We'll be heading towards nationalized BCBS-USA if deregulation occurs imo....too big too fail on a scale that will make Wachovia seem like peanuts. Be careful what you are asking for guys! I lived it in the banking arena during the 80s-90s....but I am not very knowledgable of the insurance biz. Keep the discussion going...this is a BIG deal imo and yes, imo it CAN indeed get worse than it is now and ever has been imo.

[GH85Carrera]

The simple answer for me is I can buy car insurance from a provider in another state. I can buy house insurance and life insurance for other states. What makes health care special that it HAS to be done with a state provider?

[wdfifteen]

^^
It doesn't have to be done by a state provider, only a provider who complies with your state's regulations, just like your car insurance and home owner's insurance.

[wdfifteen]

These guys aren't competing to provide the best insurance coverage at the lowest cost. They're competing to see who can make the most money. They don't give a crap about the people they insure, as long as they maximize their profit off of us.
At the same time insurance companies are crying that they can't make any money and have to drop out of markets their executive compensation is rising. No one is telling them, "You failed, you're fired." The good old boy network keeps them profitably employed no matter how badly they perform.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

One thing that has been completely overlooked is limiting the legal liability of medical practitioners. Start cutting the greedy tort lawyers out of the equation and getting rid of the dynamic where everybody looks for a litigated payday in every daily activity and watch malpractice premiums and overall costs drop.

Medical professionals who are properly trained, licensed and acting in their professional capacity while providing care and happen to make a mistake causing injury or death should have their liability capped except in cases of extreme gross negligence.

It'd be nice to see this addressed. It'd establish a nice precedent to help make our society less litigious overall.

[Tobra]

They don't lose money in every market, but it is not by mistake that they are bailing on the exchanges in a number of different markets

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

One thing that has been completely overlooked is limiting the legal liability of medical practitioners. Start cutting the greedy tort lawyers out of the equation and getting rid of the dynamic where everybody looks for a litigated payday in every daily activity and watch malpractice premiums and overall costs drop.

Medical professionals who are properly trained, licensed and acting in their professional capacity while providing care and happen to make a mistake causing injury or death should have their liability capped except in cases of extreme gross negligence.

I agree, and I think there should be some kind of peer review of cases instead of - or at least before - putting them in front of lay juries. What we have now is juries who have no medical training giving away huge pain and suffering rewards and judges who have no medical training subsequently cutting the rewards in half. It's crazy.