Isn't this exactly why the public option was pushed? So that we were not providing a gambit for the insurance companies to charge what they want without competition?
Are you daft? You think there's NO competition in the HC insurance industry?
You're twisting INTENDED consequences with
unintended ones. If you're a insurance provider, aren't you really licking your chops right now, anticipating 20 million new customers possible, even if it is at lower rates somehow?
Think. "Big Insurance" is going to get a massive windfall from all of this, get BIGGER and stronger, and probably won't worry too much about rates!
i'm not nuts, and I KNOW there is not true competition within the health insurance industry when most all states have only one or 2 insurance companies providing much more than 50% of the issued policies.
in my state, 2 insurers have 88% of the policies written....north dakota has ONE Insurer for 90% of their population, alabama....2 insurers for 80% of their population....
Anything over 30% for 1 insurer is considered by our federal gvt with other industries, a monopoly, or an UNHEALTHY economic situation for the consumer...
AND YES, i agree that it is HANDING this gift horse to the insurance industry....thus my support of the public option, so it is not a guarantee to the private insurers to get these customers without competing.
but better yet, don't make the insurance mandatory....