- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Selling Health Insurance across state lines limits state rights
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:47 pm
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:47 pm
quote:
In 2012, Ms. Corlette and co-authors completed a study of a number of states that passed laws to allow out-of-state insurance sales. Not a single out-of-state insurer had taken them up on the offer. As Ms. Corlette’s paper highlighted, there is no federal impediment to across-state-lines arrangements. The main difficulty is that most states want to regulate local products themselves. The Affordable Care Act actually has a few provisions to encourage more regional and national sales of insurance, but they have not proved popular.
LINK
The idea of selling insurance across state lines has been a talking point for the 3rd phase of Trumpcare. After doing some research, it turns out that there are currently no Federal restrictions on doing so already. In fact some states already allow it! It has not shown much success.
Why is this even a federal issue/talking point? Shouldn't the party of state's rights allow states to choose their own regulation?
This post was edited on 3/14/17 at 1:04 pm
8
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:51 pm to tigerinDC09
quote:
Insurance firms in each state are protected from interstate competition by the federal McCarran-Ferguson Act (1945), which grants states the right to regulate health plans within their borders. Large employers who self-insure are exempt from these state regulations. The result has been a patchwork of 50 different sets of state regulations; the cost for an insurer licensed in one state to enter another state market is often high. A growing number of state legislators are interested in whether some states allow or facilitate the purchase of health insurance across state boundaries or from out-of-state regulated companies. NCSL's state health insurance research and tracking shows a gradually growing number of states (at least 21 as of December 2016) and state legislators considering this idea during the past eight years and continuing to the present (listed below).
LINK
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:54 pm to GumboPot
Let him have his fun
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:59 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Insurance firms in each state are protected from interstate competition by the federal McCarran-Ferguson Act (1945), which grants states the right to regulate health plans within their borders.
This is called Federalism. I thought the GOP liked that?
Trumpcare would be taking away rights from states or am I reading this wrong?
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:07 pm to tigerinDC09
I don't think it's a horrible idea, but I also don't think it's all that great of a solution.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:18 pm to The Spleen
quote:
I don't think it's a horrible idea, but I also don't think it's all that great of a solution.
Then what's the point in hoping that the Trumpcare replacement phase will work?
It's the most stated aspect of the plan.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:18 pm to tigerinDC09
I might get skewered, but I actually kind of agree with you on this matter. I hate Obamabcare as much as the next conservative but I have yet to find anyone who can tell me where this type of thing has actually brought down premium prices appreciably. It would be nice if it were tried in a highly regulated state like New York where all acceptable plans are essentially Cadillac plans.
Also, if this were to become law, the Republicans will have basically created a federal department of insurance. I thought we wanted less bureaucracy...but it's part of the Republican mantra for about 15 -16 years now. It's not conservative. Just like the school voucher thing it's implications actually work against your overall expectations.
Also, if this were to become law, the Republicans will have basically created a federal department of insurance. I thought we wanted less bureaucracy...but it's part of the Republican mantra for about 15 -16 years now. It's not conservative. Just like the school voucher thing it's implications actually work against your overall expectations.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:19 pm to tigerinDC09
quote:
Trumpcare would be taking away rights from states or am I reading this wrong?
Yes, because the federal government has the constitutional authority to regulate commerce between states.
The McCarran-Ferguson Act allowed states to have authority over health insurance commerce. Health insurance probably lobbied the hell out of congress to pass that act so they can enjoy limited competition from state to state. It appears that the McCarran-Ferguson Act is not mandatory, it just allows intrastate health insurance commerce regulation. I would guess taht most states have chosen to regulate health insurance for the power grab.
It seems to me that by repealing McCarran-Ferguson it would return all health insurance interstate commerce back to the federal government like the rest of interstate commerce.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:22 pm to tigerinDC09
quote:
Selling Health Insurance across state lines limits state rights
Eliminating state-sanctioned monopolies isn't the same as limiting states rights. Just because a state does it doesn't mean it isn't a "big government" policy.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:23 pm to tigerinDC09
quote:
Then what's the point in hoping that the Trumpcare replacement phase will work?
I don't know. I think the 3 phase plan is dumb, and only came about because of the initial backlash the ACHA bill received.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:39 pm to tigerinDC09
quote:Aren't you an attorney? If so, shouldn't you know the "restriction" is a state can't regulate an out-of-state seller of insurance under current federal law.
, it turns out that there are currently no Federal restrictions on doing so already.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 2:05 pm to tigerinDC09
When all those companies merge you will still be f*#cked.
See communication/media industry.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 2:09 pm to tigerinDC09
selling across state lines is not going to happen.
its already available in 3 states and no one will participate because they dont want to invest the money in networking doctors, plans and customer service over long distance.
its another bullshite promise of Republicans and Trump that they say will bring down cost and its a lie.
its already available in 3 states and no one will participate because they dont want to invest the money in networking doctors, plans and customer service over long distance.
its another bullshite promise of Republicans and Trump that they say will bring down cost and its a lie.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 2:12 pm to tigerinDC09
quote:
Shouldn't the party of state's rights allow states to choose their own regulation?
Not getting to whether or not this is good idea.
I am a big state's right's fan and interstate commerce has been so overused as a justification that it has almost lost all meaning...BUT this does seem like a legitimate interstate commerce regulation issue.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 2:13 pm to GumboPot
frick, what a beatdown. First post best post.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 2:17 pm to tigerinDC09
quote:
This is called Federalism. I thought the GOP liked that?
They love their States Rights, except when they don't. They're also trying to take away California's authority to issue its own clean air regulations.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 2:21 pm to Jim Rockford
You guys are supporting state's rights now? Its a damn miracle.
You good with a state telling the fed gov to go to hell over refugee resettlement now too?
You good with a state telling the fed gov to go to hell over refugee resettlement now too?
Posted on 3/14/17 at 2:27 pm to roadGator
quote:
You guys are supporting state's rights now? Its a damn miracle.
You good with a state telling the fed gov to go to hell over refugee resettlement now too?
No that's completely different because the children!
Posted on 3/14/17 at 2:31 pm to tigerinDC09
its not going to matter, making it so companies can sell across state lines doesn't change any local state rules or regulations, they still control all that. what they dont control is limiting competition so they can get payoffs and political contributions at the expense of higher costs to the people of that state.
starts now act as local mob boss dictating what goes on in their territory for a cut of the action. that's why costs are so damn high and why they don't want open competition, because then the companies no longer need to buy them off
starts now act as local mob boss dictating what goes on in their territory for a cut of the action. that's why costs are so damn high and why they don't want open competition, because then the companies no longer need to buy them off
Posted on 3/14/17 at 2:42 pm to keakar
What percentage of medical premiums are payoffs and compare that to the percentage of premiums that is the largest component of rates please.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News