Allow Americans to purchase health insurance across state lines?

[debbiedowner]

That's one of the GOP's big selling points of their healthcare 'plan'.

Problem is, it's already allowed.

The Federal government does not prohibit it. Some states do.

oops.

Selling health insurance across state lines is a favorite GOP 'reform.' Here's why it makes no sense

"Selling insurance across state lines is a vacuous idea, encrusted with myths.

The most important myths are that it’s illegal today, and that it’s an alternative to the Affordable Care Act.

The truth is that it actually is legal today and specifically enabled by the Affordable Care Act. The fact that Republicans don’t seem to know this should tell you something about their understanding of healthcare policy. The fact that it hasn’t happened despite its enablement under the ACA should tell you more about about why it’s no solution to anything."

Useful thread but it falls on mostly deaf ears. It points out that the gop is against the basic economic justification of Obamacare policies. Yes states can agree to have policies sold over state lines. But each state governs policies, and policy provisions, differently. And yuuuge insurers within states have the bargaining power to force hospitals and docs to accept lower payments. That's Obamacare's concept of competition. Monopolies. If a monopoly is really gouging another monopoly will move it. (it doesn't work)

The gop doesn't have the votes to repeal. But it's basic ideology (not that the gop lacks corrupt statists too) is that there shouldn't be monopolies. Wait, the gop loves monopoles. Msft.

Force? It's called networks that signed a contract with that insurer with what they will accept from the insurer, been around a hell of a lot longer than obamacare.

 

[whitehall]

Anyone who is anyone on the left agrees that the ironically named ACA is imploding and has to be fixed. Democrats don't even dispute allegations that they voted for the monstrosity without reading it. There might a lot of myths floating around for idiotic left wing blogs to latch on to but just about everyone agrees that there is a lot that needs to be fixed. The logical question is why aren't democrats joining with the President in trying to fix it instead of pretending to be bystanders when they freaking caused it? A similar event happened when the economy collapsed just in time for the 08 presidential election. Democrats were in charge during the 2nd half of the 2nd Bush administration and while Fannie Mae collapsed bringing down the economy. Why did democrat chairman of the House Banking Committee tell us that Fannie Mae was solvent just before it collapsed? Is it possible that democrats are playing the same political game and the Country be damned?

 

[debbiedowner]

I agree. Competition brings prices down and if all insurance companies have to compete for you're dollar prices will go down.

Don't know bout you but I'm the cheapest bitch on the planet and I shop for the best I can get for the lowest price. So will everyone else. Insurance companies will have to lower prices to compete for you're dollar.

The problem with the US health care system isn't government. It's the whole idea that people's health is a tradable commodity. I'm European and I pay way less for at least comparable, if not better healthcare. Our system is government controlled and it's more efficient and cheaper. My wife is American so I can make these claims both by personal experience and researchable facts.

Cough!.............What percentage of the European income goes to taxes? Europe doesn't even have the capacity to defend itself. They rely on the USA. Then consider the USA is far more complex than say Switzerland. Europe is broke.

I agree. Most still have armies but how many of those armies have ever been in combat?? Not since WWII have any of those armies ever fought a war.

They depend on us to come to their aid if they ever have to fight again.

Do you think it was only the U.S. that fought and are still fighting in the Middle East. Have you ever heard of NATO troops and what NATO means?

Sadly it is only USA that fights and dies these day!!

Well what's your boy trump doing to change that? Not a damn thing, in fact he's sent more.

 

[debbiedowner]

The states are the ones prohibiting interstate purchasing, not the Federal government.

Is that really too hard for you to understand?

Liberals are known for attaching huge amounts of forbidden Federal authority to relatively simple Constitutional phrases such as "Congress shall have the power... to regulate Commerce... among the several states."

But here we see a liberal trying to pretend that phrase does NOT give Congress the power to regulate Commerce among the several states. It's OK, he says, for states to regulate the sale of health insurance across state lines, and even for the state to forbid the its own citizens to buy health insurance from a different state.

I have no doubt that many states are doing that. Many of them try to regulate firearms, too. Whether it's LEGAL for them to do those things, is another question.

Is insurance interstate commerce?
Sustaining the demurrer, the District Court held that "the business of insurance is notcommerce, either intrastate or interstate"; it "is not interstate commerce orinterstate trade, though it might be considered a trade subject to local laws either State or Federal, where the commerce clause is not the authority

 

[g5000]

My career was as a health insurance and HMO executive. my title was VP of Underwriting and Compliance.

Health insurance and HMO's are governed by State Law. I had to file policies and rates with state health insurance Commissioners. The only time I ever had to deal with the Feds was regarding our policy issued to cover their employees. Each state has their own statues about what must be covered. For example, Nevada requires that acupuncture be covered. Most states don't. In order to be approved in each state, we had to file state amendments, with their particular deviations. I worked in one of the largest insurance companies in America, and all it took to be in compliance with all the states was one Director of Compliance and one administrative assistant. In short, if I were able to file one policy for approval for all states, instead of 50 policy amendments, I would have been able to save the HM0 about $120,000 per year. Divided by 230,000 insureds, that comes to a savings of half of one cent per insured per year.

And yet auto, home, and life insurance companies do it every single day.

 

[Seawytch]

My career was as a health insurance and HMO executive. my title was VP of Underwriting and Compliance.

Health insurance and HMO's are governed by State Law. I had to file policies and rates with state health insurance Commissioners. The only time I ever had to deal with the Feds was regarding our policy issued to cover their employees. Each state has their own statues about what must be covered. For example, Nevada requires that acupuncture be covered. Most states don't. In order to be approved in each state, we had to file state amendments, with their particular deviations. I worked in one of the largest insurance companies in America, and all it took to be in compliance with all the states was one Director of Compliance and one administrative assistant. In short, if I were able to file one policy for approval for all states, instead of 50 policy amendments, I would have been able to save the HM0 about $120,000 per year. Divided by 230,000 insureds, that comes to a savings of half of one cent per insured per year.

And yet auto, home, and life insurance companies do it every single day.

Please Stop Comparing Health Insurance to Car Insurance

 

[WorldWatcher]

Is insurance interstate commerce?
Sustaining the demurrer, the District Court held that "the business of insurance is notcommerce, either intrastate or interstate"; it "is not interstate commerce orinterstate trade, though it might be considered a trade subject to local laws either State or Federal, where the commerce clause is not the authority

And the Supreme Court reversed the ruling by the District Court in the case of United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters. (United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters 322 U.S. 533 (1944))

"Ordinarily courts do not construe words used in the Constitution so as to give them a meaning more narrow than one which they had in the common parlance of the times in which the Constitution was written. To hold that the word "commerce," as used in the Commerce Clause, does not include a business such as insurance would do just that. Whatever other meanings "commerce" may have included in 1787, the dictionaries, encyclopedias, and other books of the period show that it included trade: business in which persons bought and sold, bargained and contracted. And this meaning has persisted to modern times. Surely, therefore, a heavy burden is on him who asserts that the plenary power which the Commerce Clause grants to Congress to regulate "Commerce among the several States" does not include the power to regulate trading in insurance to the same extent that it includes power to regulate other trades or businesses conducted across state lines."





>>>>

 

[Rustic]

That's one of the GOP's big selling points of their healthcare 'plan'.

Problem is, it's already allowed.

The Federal government does not prohibit it. Some states do.

oops.

Selling health insurance across state lines is a favorite GOP 'reform.' Here's why it makes no sense

"Selling insurance across state lines is a vacuous idea, encrusted with myths.

The most important myths are that it’s illegal today, and that it’s an alternative to the Affordable Care Act.

The truth is that it actually is legal today and specifically enabled by the Affordable Care Act. The fact that Republicans don’t seem to know this should tell you something about their understanding of healthcare policy. The fact that it hasn’t happened despite its enablement under the ACA should tell you more about about why it’s no solution to anything."

The whole concept of insurance is fucked up... hundred percent chance it's going to be abused

 

[Skull Pilot]

Your article notes that it is essentially illegal to sell across state lines in most of the states. You fail

So if Federal government allows it, it's irrelevant.

If the Federal government forces it, then one might think that conservatives would object to the federal government interfering with the states.

This is one of the legit uses of the commerce clause

The federal government can say it is legal and someone will start. Once one company does they all will so they can compete
remember when car insurance was not sold across state lines? Remember what car insurance used to cost?

 

[WorldWatcher]

The federal government can say it is legal and someone will start. Once one company does they all will so they can compete
remember when car insurance was not sold across state lines? Remember what car insurance used to cost?

The Federal government has already said it's legal to sell Health Insurance across state lines. The barriers to cross-state lines are limitation placed by the states.

Secondly, you don't really buy car insurance across state lines. Car insurance policies must still conform to the laws of that state to be allowed to be sold there and the premiums paid are based on your residence not where you bought the policy. You are not going to pay upstate Maine premiums when you live in Los Angeles. You might have the same insurance company but you will not have the same policy or pay the same rates.



>>>>

 

[Skull Pilot]

The federal government can say it is legal and someone will start. Once one company does they all will so they can compete
remember when car insurance was not sold across state lines? Remember what car insurance used to cost?

The Federal government has already said it's legal to sell Health Insurance across state lines. The barriers to cross-state lines are limitation placed by the states.

Secondly, you don't really buy car insurance across state lines. Car insurance policies must still conform to the laws of that state to be allowed to be sold there and the premiums paid are based on your residence not where you bought the policy. You are not going to pay upstate Maine premiums when you live in Los Angeles. You might have the same insurance company but you will not have the same policy or pay the same rates.



>>>>

I can buy car insurance from a company with no physical presence in my state

the federal gov could use the commerce clause to compel states to allow cross border sales of health insurance

at least for once they'd use the power of the commerce clause to help the consumer

 

[WorldWatcher]

I can buy car insurance from a company with no physical presence in my state

I didn't say you couldn't.

But the policy you buy will have to conform to your state laws and you will pay premiums based on your location. I live in Virginia, we have Nationwide Insurance for out Auto's. The policy has to conform to Virginia law and I pay premiums based on the Tidewater area of the state. Even though my insurance provider is a national company I can't buy a policy for Maine and pay Maine rates.


>>>>

 

[bendog]

I can buy car insurance from a company with no physical presence in my state

I didn't say you couldn't.

But the policy you buy will have to conform to your state laws and you will pay premiums based on your location. I live in Virginia, we have Nationwide Insurance for out Auto's. The policy has to conform to Virginia law and I pay premiums based on the Tidewater area of the state. Even though my insurance provider is a national company I can't buy a policy for Maine and pay Maine rates.


>>>>

Yes, and it begs a question. Why is "buying across state lines" a buzzword for the gop. Wyo, for instance, has compacts with other state insurance commissioners allowing for buying across lines, and the states agree as to premium and coverage .... in effect setting up an insurance purchasing co-op.

But expand that on a natl basis, without requiring each state ins commissioner to sign off, you have ONE national standard set by federal officials. Why would the gop want that? I mean it may be a good idea, but it further big gummit control.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Yes, and it begs a question. Why is "buying across state lines" a buzzword for the gop. Wyo, for instance, has compacts with other state insurance commissioners allowing for buying across lines, and the states agree as to premium and coverage .... in effect setting up an insurance purchasing co-op.

But expand that on a natl basis, without requiring each state ins commissioner to sign off, you have ONE national standard set by federal officials. Why would the gop want that? I mean it may be a good idea, but it further big gummit control.

Right now the choice to allow insurance sales across State lines is a function of State law, there is no federal restriction.

What it appears the GOP is calling for is Federal overreach into the powers of the State in the area of instra-state commerce and enforcing a national option that ignores state requirements and laws.

We (as a member of the GOP) should watch what we ask for, we just might get it and establishing such Federal power might not be something we are happy with when applied to other areas. (Or even in the area of Health Insurance for that matter.)

But it just amazes me that some people think that interstate sales of health insurance will result in someone living in Sacramento CA paying the same rates on someone living in the suburbs of Richmond VA.


>>>>

 

[bendog]

Yes, and it begs a question. Why is "buying across state lines" a buzzword for the gop. Wyo, for instance, has compacts with other state insurance commissioners allowing for buying across lines, and the states agree as to premium and coverage .... in effect setting up an insurance purchasing co-op.

But expand that on a natl basis, without requiring each state ins commissioner to sign off, you have ONE national standard set by federal officials. Why would the gop want that? I mean it may be a good idea, but it further big gummit control.

Right now the choice to allow insurance sales across State lines is a function of State law, there is no federal restriction.

What it appears the GOP is calling for is Federal overreach into the powers of the State in the area of instra-state commerce and enforcing a national option that ignores state requirements and laws.

We (as a member of the GOP) should watch what we ask for, we just might get it and establishing such Federal power might not be something we are happy with when applied to other areas. (Or even in the area of Health Insurance for that matter.)

But it just amazes me that some people think that interstate sales of health insurance will result in someone living in Sacramento CA paying the same rates on someone living in the suburbs of Richmond VA.


>>>>

Well I think the gop's call for "buying HC insurance over state lines" would result literally in "someone living in Sacramento CA paying the same rates on someone living in the suburbs of Richmond VA." But why would the gop want that?

I think the one thing dem and gop would agree on is that the main reason our HC is so much more expensive than anyone's else is lack of market transparency. For example, there are numbers of makers of artificial hips and knees. But your surgeon chooses one, and you have no idea of cost or quality, nor do you have any idea why your surgeon chooses it, e.g. lunch with the medical equip sales guy? The entire premise of Obamacare is more or less push that decision up the state ladders to have one monopolistic insurance coverage company bargain with all those installing the artificial hips and joints, so as to find the cheapest in-state provider.

The criticism fundamentally is that if the CONSUMER was making those choices we'd have a better outcome. Auto insurance for example does have some in-state competition. You can get rates from all licensed insurors. Or, more likely, you use an insurance broker to find the cheapest rate, that also actually results in getting payment to get the car fixed.

Perhaps, theoretically, being able to purchase insurance offered in NY would increase my insurer options here in Mississippi. But anyone should know that medical providers there are going to average much higher costs than here. Put another way, more competition because of a national rather than state/regional market might save money NATIONALLY. But it's hard to see how Red states' benefit.

 

[forkup]

health as a way to make profit

this is exactly what we want in cars and health. If someone does it well they make a huge profit, others copy and compete with them, and the quality of cars and health gets better and better while those who do it poorly go bankrupt.

I'm sorry I wasn't aware that companies have altruism at it's core. Car manufacturers and drug companies have making profit at it's core I always assumed. Never knew doing good was their motive. For someone touting the virtues of capitalism you seem to have little understanding of how it works. I've given you real life examples backed by statistical information. You have given conservative talking points. Let's put what you say here to the test. If what you say is true, then health care should have become both higher quality and cheaper. This would have to show in statistics.

Oops seems theirs something wrong with your theory here. Healthcare costs have more then doubled from 2002 to 2013. So if the market will sort itself out, how has this happened????? And don't blame ACA or democrats, this Graph starts during the Bush era.

 

[Reasonable]

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I'm sorry I wasn't aware that companies have altruism at it's core..

human beings do and capitalism reinforces it. It's what our founders called natural law. The company that loves or pleases its customers most survives and the others go bankrupt. If you doubt it try going into business with a substandard product?? Can you figure put what would happen??

Always remember, a liberal believes in magical govt because he lacks the IQ to understand freedom and capitalism.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If what you say is true, then health care should have become both higher quality and cheaper.

you have learned 6 times now that liberals made capitalism illegal in health care with McCarran Furguson in 1945. Should we go for 7 times?? Do you want to be a liberal for the rest of your life?

 

[Cellblock2429]

Your article notes that it is essentially illegal to sell across state lines in most of the states. You fail

So if Federal government allows it, it's irrelevant.

If the Federal government forces it, then one might think that conservatives would object to the federal government interfering with the states.

Try to keep up here. The OP's premise of a national free market insurance market being legal is a myth. There was obviously many other problems present in the law to make it unworkable. Simply saying it was okay to offer the plans, does little to make it reality. It is the federal government's interference that makes it a problem. Again it boils down to free markets and less government.

I agree. Competition brings prices down and if all insurance companies have to compete for you're dollar prices will go down.

Don't know bout you but I'm the cheapest bitch on the planet and I shop for the best I can get for the lowest price. So will everyone else. Insurance companies will have to lower prices to compete for you're dollar.

The problem with the US health care system isn't government. It's the whole idea that people's health is a tradable commodity. I'm European and I pay way less for at least comparable, if not better healthcare. Our system is government controlled and it's more efficient and cheaper. My wife is American so I can make these claims both by personal experience and researchable facts.

Thanks for the info but I doubt you're country had 300 million citizens or a Govt. that turns everything into red tape, mountains of paperwork and log waits.

Glad it works for you but I seriously doubt it would work here in America.

/--- We can already buy auto, life, liability and home owners insurance across state lines. There may be other types as well. But Washington loses control is health insurance is sold across those state lines.