Not exactly. Insurers in many markets tend to be reluctant to use their market clout to push back against what might be called extortive price increases from large provider organizations. Sometimes they need an external forcing. Two years ago, for instance, Massachusetts provided one in a somewhat heavy-handed regulatory fashion. A robust public option, on the other hand, would've provided a similar impetus via competitive pressures.
The general conservative consensus, as far as I can tell, is exactly the opposite. At least the segment that continues to push their variant of an "across state lines" proposal for individual market insurance policies.
