mskafka
Silver Member
It is a great idea in theory. But like veritas said: businesses are going to gravitate to the states that will regulate them the least. If this is going to be a policy, it needs to be tweaked.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Baucus Plan: State Insurance Regulation, National Plans
One of the big questions with insurance offerings is who regulates the plans, and how. Currently, regulation is done at the state level. Republicans don't like this, and neither do Democrats, and neither do insurers. It means every insurer needs to offer different plans in every state. Fragmentation and inefficiency, thy name is America's health-care system.
Republicans want insurance companies to be able to sell across state lines, using the regulations of the state where they're based. This is pretty much what happens in the credit card industry, and it's why most companies are headquartered in South Dakota: The regulations are virtually nonexistent, allowing for all manner of chicanery.
Democrats, conversely, want the regulations to be federal in nature. One single standard that all plans have to meet. Baucus's bill allows for both.
To satisfy the Republicans, Baucus creates "health care choice compacts." These are agreements between different states to allow insurers to sell across their lines. California, Nevada and Wyoming, for instance, could form a compact, and insurers based in Wyoming could sell a product conforming to Wyoming's regulatory standards in all three states. The voluntary nature of the compacts is important here: California presumably wouldn't want to partner with Alabama, as that would junk all the regulations they've built over the years.
To satisfy the Democrats, Baucus's bill allows for the creation of "national plans." The bill directs "The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), in consultation with consumer groups, business interests, including small businesses, the insurance industry, federal regulators, and benefit experts" to create a uniform set of benefit standards that insurers would have to meet to offer a national plan. Once met, that plan could be offered in every state, as it would preempt state regulations. Presumably, that plan would also have more bargaining power and substantial efficiencies of scale, as it will be national, rather than confined to a single state. This could prove seriously transformative in the private insurance market.
By Ezra Klein | September 16, 2009; 12:34 PM ET
uh because........they'll all go to one or two of the least regulated states and operate out of them. And then what we will have is more like a credit card corporate haven situation.
And life insurance is an investment vehicle as much as it is insurance, or maybe more so. Car insurance and homeowners is highly regulated.
T: you would never get off the ground. Somebody would find all of your posts here and use them against you........lmao.
It is a great idea in theory. But like veritas said: businesses are going to gravitate to the states that will regulate them the least. If this is going to be a policy, it needs to be tweaked.
Ame®icano;1555664 said:If they really wanted competition, they would support a public option.
What a bunch of chickenshi....
What kind of competition is when governemnt is trying to kill private option (Medicare Advantage) in favor of public (government) option?
Ame®icano;1555664 said:If they really wanted competition, they would support a public option.
What a bunch of chickenshi....
What kind of competition is when governemnt is trying to kill private option (Medicare Advantage) in favor of public (government) option?
LMAO. Too true.Ame®icano;1565428 said:Baucus is from Montana.
Yeah, those flyover states. No real Americans live there and we as a nation can just ignore them.oh yes right, I was thinking of the other stiff, Kent Conrad.............one of the other gang of six.
Sorry. I get all those interior states mixed up. Doesn't matter anyway....less than 1.5 million people live in both states combined.
Yeah, those flyover states. No real Americans live there and we as a nation can just ignore them.oh yes right, I was thinking of the other stiff, Kent Conrad.............one of the other gang of six.
Sorry. I get all those interior states mixed up. Doesn't matter anyway....less than 1.5 million people live in both states combined.