29 California House Democrats, led by Jackie Speier, have teamed up with the two Maine Democrats to write a letter objecting to provisions in the House and Senate health care bills that allow insurers from one state to sell policies in other states, possibly circumventing more stringent consumer protection laws in the buyer’s home state. You can view the whole PDF over the flip or at scribd.
Rep. Speier has always been a champion of consumer rights, and this is just one more example of that. If a real national market develops in health insurance, providers will rush to states that will let them do whatever they want. Much like credit cards are consolidated in two states, Deleware and South Dakota, that have given them the most favorable terms, insurance plans will shop for the most permissive states.
Of course, both Maine and California aren’t likely to be those states. We have too much respect for our citizens for that. Yet some state, be it South Dakota, or whomever, will try to lure the business to their state by promising them as little regulation as they can get away with. And the real losers are the Americans that are now forced to buy insurance coverage with little oversight.
Frankly, you would think that if there was one place where even the most strident market-obsessed politician would see the failures of the market, it would be healthcare. But nope, on they trudge, doing their darndest to make sure that everything is guided by Adam Smith’s inivisble hand, and hoping for the best.
One hopes that the Democratic leadership takes this letter very seriously as we come up with whatever mess of a health care plan we are going to get from this muddled process.
you people blow my mind.
you support “choice” when it fits your values; regarding abortion, regarding same sex couples, regarding recreational drug usage, but when it comes to how one chooses to spend his or her own money, i’m astounded how anti-choice, and hence how illiberal those who claim to be for individual choice truly are and unthinkingly believing in statist conformity.
if i can get a better deal for my car insurance in texas, life insurance in florida, and homeowner’s insurance in colorado, who are you, via government coercion to tell me i can’t? do you know better than i do my own personal situation?? my income??? my station in life???? do my values not matter?? does my own level of risk assessment not matter??
i would never think of preventing you from exercising your own right to getting the best deal you can for you and your family. yet many, i would argue most, of you and those of your opinion, and with such incredulity and a misguided hate for insurance companies that should be reserved for the likes of a hugo chavez, kim jong il, and the mullahs in iran, think you know better than me regarding me.
you sir do not. i find your position bordering on the totalitarian, and i do not use that term lightly.
regarding your statements;
#1; you bring up the canard that is credit card companies to compare with insurance companies. unsecured credit is not insurance. you should know that. why do you deliberately try and compare apples to oranges instead of comparing health insurance companies to other types of insurance companies. the issue is making insurance affordable, and hence more accessible and not credit.
#2; you contradict your own argument. from paragraph two you state “If a real national market develops in health insurance, providers will rush to states that will let them do whatever they want.” yet in paragraph 4 you state that “Frankly, you would think that if there was one place where even the most strident market-obsessed politician would see the failures of the market, it would be healthcare.” so which is it, there is a market failure (paragraph 4) or the lack or a real market (paragraph 2)?? it cannot be both.
you are right in paragraph 2 that there is no national insurance market in health care like there is for automobile, life and homeowners insurance. not coincidentally there is much less consternation in all three of those markets and not the escalating costs year-over-year like there is in health care. your statement that the health insurance market is either factually incorrect or intentionally deceptive. again which is it? it cannot be both.
whether you like it or not, obamacare or reidcare or pelosicare or whatever you want to call the bill that is less about health care and all about getting to a single payer health care insurance system in my united states of america where private health insurance, i.e. how and how much money one chooses to spend on his/her own and families health insurance as they see fit, becomes illegal at some point in the future is nothing short of un-american. every major/reputable poll has it hitting new lows every day and the more people learn about the specifics that should it pass become governing law, the more they oppose it.
among the more popular reform ideas that have become part of the debate but never part of a bill is the very provision that would allow health insurance to be sold across state lines. if you want to buy insurance from a california company, knock yourself out. if somebody else can’t afford the many mandates that the democrats in the state legislature keep adding onto health insurance policies currently available, and only available, to california residents, or simply has no need to include accupuncture as part of his/her policy, THAT CHOICE BELONGS TO THEM, AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO IMPOSE YOUR POLITICS INTO THEIR FREED0OM TO CONTRACT FOR SERVICES FOR THEM, PAID FOR BY THEM.
good riddance and good day