Social Question

JLeslie's avatar

Does the final version of the health care bill really promote buying insurance across state lines?

Asked by JLeslie (65746points) April 18th, 2010

Last night I was discussing health care with a friend and he brought up the issue of buying insurance across state lines. I had been under the impression that the final bill allowed for this. When I searched on line, it seems is allows for states to have agreements to allow insurers from other states, but they have to meet regulations of that state. Here is an article I found http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/five_compronises_in_health_car.html

So, that to me means it is still really up to the state government whether an individual can buy across state lines.

I’d like to know how you understand this part of the health care bill to actually work in practice?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

11 Answers

Ron_C's avatar

The only protection we currently have from insurance company abuses is on the state level. If that protection is removed the insurance companies would do the same thing as credit card companies. They move their headquarters (at least as far as billing is concerned) to the state that has the least restrictions and oversight. This completely cuts your state out of the loop and allows the insurance company to do anything it likes as long as it does not violate the laws of it’s “headquarters” state. That is the reason that interest and penalty rates on credit card are so high.

JLeslie's avatar

@Ron_C I had not thought of that. So, it seems we need federal guidelines more than anything. I really hate when I lose or gain a lot just by moving to a different state, it makes no sense to me in the UNITED states.

Ron_C's avatar

@JLeslie the Tea Party is particularly against Federal guidelines, in almost anything especially in health care. I think that reflects more the view of their sponsors than the reasoned result of their individual research.

JLeslie's avatar

@Ron_C Everything is a contradiction. Increase interstate commerce, including healthcare insurance, but don’t allow any regulation that would matter. Conservative on the budget, but in favor of going to war without paying for it, willing to let it put the country into deep deficit. Individual rights, but make sure only a man and a woman can go into a marriage contract. I know these might not all be Tea Party senitments, there are contradictions within all of the parties. Drives me crazy.

ETpro's avatar

The idea of buying insurance across state lines sounds attractive, but the big gotcha in it is holding insurers outside state jurisdiction accountable. If you just allowed inter-state sales period, the insurance industry, with their enormous financial resources, would pick some small state and buy their way into total control of its legislature. They would then modify that state’s laws so the only rule left was “Heads we win, tails you loose.”

Something akin to that already happened with the credit card industry. In my state, it is illegal to charge more than 12% annual interest. But credit card companies are all located in states where what used to be called loan sharking and carried a long prison sentence is now legally approved.

We would shoot ourselves in the foot big-time if we opened up insurance sales across state lines without a national regulatory commission, and the Teahadist would pour into the streets with pitch forks at the mention of regulation.

Dr_Dredd's avatar

Teahadist. Heh. I like that. :-)

Ron_C's avatar

@ETpro I think the main problem is that Americans have been sold a “free trade” bill of goods. It seems that the propaganda states that regulation of capitalism is wrong and somehow socialist.

Unregulated capitalism was what caused all of the depressions and the current recession. We started this when people actually believed what Reagen said instead of looking at his actions. Clinton signed NAFTA and sent jobs away, Bush either ed-regulated or eviscerated the regulatory agencies and finished the job.

Unregulated capitalism is just as destructive of the socialist demand economy. The trick is to find the balance and not let banks invent worthless stock and sell it to unsuspecting buyers. I think this part of the reason Madoff is in jail. There needs to be many more stock traders and bankers in jail where they can’t harm the country.

ETpro's avatar

@Ron_C I am truly getting tired of hearing people constantly misusing the trerm socialism. It has become an incantation used much like heretic, witch and devil worshiper was in the Dark Ages, and if it becomes pervasive in American politics it will provide cover for Fascist Corporatist to destroy all we hold dear in this land. Interesting the fascist Corporatists were—socialists!

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.”—Benito Mussolini

Ron_C's avatar

@ETpro A tremendous number of people don’t know the difference or the fact that communists and Nazis were bitter enemies. If history keeps getting dumbed down buy organizations like the Texas School board, future Americans will probably not know the difference.

ETpro's avatar

@Ron_C Churches will have to stop having church socials because that would make them a bunch of Communo-Fascist Socialists.

Ron_C's avatar

@ETpro socials and meetings are a part of any club. What they do is not my business or the governments as long as I don’t have to help pay for the pot roast.

Tax wise, or freedom of speech or association-wise, there is no difference between a Catholic Mass or White Power rally. I don’t have to approve and don’t have to attend or pay for either.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther