Comments on: Are the Insurance Regulations Enforceable?

By: jeopardy

jeopardy — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 06:26:54 +0000

battling recissions in court is not working well.

a) As a practical matter, the law on fraud, etc for people signing up for health plans is written in most states in a way that greatly favors the insurance companies (they have good lobbyists if you haven’t noticed). I’ve read suggestions that it’s similar in the Senate Bill, but I would need to verify that.

b) moreover, what’s been happening is that the insurance companies will basically draw it out and harass people for years, and then settle right before if they are about to lose.

c) Each case would have to be heard on a case-by-case basis, so A LOT of people, usually poor and sick, would be going through that hell.

d) Recissions simply being illegal has not helped in the states that have them, because of the lack of enforcement. A law is nothing without being enforceable.
__

there would be some fairly easy ways to have the Executive Branch or the states be responsible for enforcing this instead of just the courts:

a) assign enforcement power to some executive branch agency, LIKE THEY HAVE DONE WITH ASSIGNING ENFORCEMENT FOR THE MANDATE TO THE IRS

b) bribe the states to enforce it by paying them for it – give them the money to do it and condition the money on using it for enforcement. That would not violate the 10th Amendment.

By: jeopardy

jeopardy — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 06:24:09 +0000

double post

By: edcool

edcool — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 18:06:11 +0000

In the system of Capitolism,you may buy,you may sell OR ABSTAIN;TARP(Time for another revolution)Democracy,Hell we live in a MONEYCRACY!

By: murphyj87

murphyj87 — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:35:59 +0000

Because maintaining the insurance monopoly was the very first of 175 concessions to Ben Nelson even before the 300 concessions to Joe Lieberman.

By: citizenjoe

citizenjoe — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:32:02 +0000

Have you seen Olbermann and Wendell Potter on the health care sell-out? They pretty much destroy Obama and the Democrats attempts to spin and lie:

“Senate Bill a Big Win for Insurance Companies,” Countdown with Keith Olbermann, December 16, 2009

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#34455097

By: brel1

brel1 — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 13:50:51 +0000

And how are they going to force people to carry health insurance? Are people going to end up in jail for not getting having health care (maybe in jail is the only way they get medical care)? Many are far too poor to pay a fine and fines will mount up and never be paid. Its not going to hurt the people who have nothing and the people struggling will just have another burden.

By: chitowner

chitowner — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 10:09:26 +0000

Thanks for the analysis. But all I need to know about the effectiveness of “government regulation” is how well it stopped Wall Street from crashing the financial system. All it takes is another president like Bush (or Obama the way things are going) to thwart government regulation. Even though a great deal of deregulation has occurred since Reagan, laws and regs still on the books weren’t enforced leading to the crash. I’m so angry at the Corporate Democrats and Mr. Bait and Switch Obama right now, I’d like to see Progressives just walk away and let the whole health care thing blow up in their crony capitalist faces. If this bill passes with the coverage enforcement provision and no public option, I hope it’s challenged in the courts and ruled unconstitutional. If not, civil disobedience will be my course of action – along with finding a third party.

By: selise

selise — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 09:46:35 +0000

it gets better (as in not, especially for states that have tried to do a decent job of insurance regulation). from the letter to pelosi and reid:

The interstate compact provisions in both H.R. 3962 and the Senate proposal, as currently written, will lead to a race to the bottom in insurance regulation and severely threaten the important and often lifesaving protections the residents of our states enjoy. In the Senate bill, insurers are permitted to sell policies in our states while only being subject to the regulations of the state in which the policy is written or issued. H.R. 3962 permits states to decide among themselves which regulations will govern, which could make the regulations in the consumer- friendly state irrelevant. Practically speaking, insurers will domicile their plans in states with less stringent regulations and market to the population in more protective states like ours, just like nationally chartered banks have done.

By: joerg

joerg — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 02:35:06 +0000

So, why don’t we yank the insurance companies anti-trust exemption. Then we could regulate them at the Federal level and even out the playing field a bit.

By: deltalitprof

deltalitprof — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 02:26:57 +0000

Here’s a stupid question: why wouldn’t you just pass the regulations (which would survive a filibuster attempt) under the regular rules, then pass the budget-affecting portions of the bill under reconciliation?