Quote:
Originally Posted by 4-2-7
lol
Im talking about prior to the bill.
Insurance providers were only aloud to operate in designated states.
Providing a monopoly and shooting fish in a bowl.
|
Not exactly. Traditionally, insurance of all types (auto, homeowners, health...) have been
regulated by the states. This was
codified by Congress in 1945. However, that doesn't mean that there aren't enough insurers in any state to preclude free and open competition. As noted in a previous post, I have nearly 40 choices here in Maryland and that was already the case before Obamacare.
In that states have long had a state regulatory structure for insurance (i.e., a state insurance commission), they're disinclined to give this authority up to the Federal government. It's kinda odd that the GOP frequently says it wants insurance to cross state lines (i.e., to be regulated by the Federal government under the Commerce Clause), while at the same time they say that the best government is state and local because it's closer to the people. I doubt that it would really have any material difference in pricing. You can get all the competition with several dozen companies operating in each state. The only meaningful difference in state pricing was that some states required different minimum policies and others didn't. This is now moot with Obamacare.
That said, the more companies you have, the more differenet paperwork your doctor has to process with an increased staff (and increased cost). Don't buy into the GOP panancea of buying insurance across state lines. The only real difference it will make is that it will drive your doctor's front office staff crazy.