One of the reasons many of us had so many problems with the health care legislation running through the Congress was that it lacked a federal overseer for the insurance regulations. As such, it punted those responsibilities over to the states, which have proven themselves unwilling or unable to enforce strict regulations. The design of the exchanges, from a state-based framework in the Senate bill to a more national framework in the House bill, alleviate some of this, but still the enforcement falls to the states.
Radical moderate Dianne Feinstein, of all people, has a solution to this – creating a Medical Insurance Rate Authority which would have say over insurer rate hikes at the federal level. It’s a small leap from this, intended to react to Anthem Blue Cross’ 39% rate hike in California, and a federal regulator of the health insurance industry with oversight over all regulations.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Friday that she plans to introduce legislation that would bar insurance companies from enacting health insurance premium rate increases that the Secretary of the Health and Human Services deems to be unjustified.
The bill would create a national Medical Insurance Rate Authority, which would be able to prevent such increases. Feinstein’s announcement follows reports that Anthem Blue Cross had intended to jack up premiums for certain policyholders in California by as much as 39 percent.
This should be enacted tomorrow. It leads to the fixing of one of the most glaring problems with the health care bill – its weak regulatory enforcement framework. We know from the financial collapse that federal regulators aren’t bullet-proof. But they exceed by leaps and bounds the state network of regulators, who are even more susceptible to industry capture.
Eric Massa said in his talk with supporters that this would be a good way to get Republicans on the record with their belief in the interstate sale of insurance. “We’ll agree to that, if there’s a federal regulator. A single federal regulator. A single payer federal regulator…” Obviously, there’s no way Republicans would agree to such a thing, since their purpose in seeking interstate insurance is to make the health insurance industry look like the credit card industry, where all the companies pile into one state with virtually no regulations and then leave everyone no choice but to buy that crappy product.
So it’s an open question whether this Feinstein bill will take off. But by centering it solely on insurance rates at first, perhaps she can back-door it into existence.





36 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
“Radical moderate Feinstein?”
there’s your jobs creation, right there. where can I apply? sounds very lucrative.
It’s about time that the Democrats start putting forth some plans to put the good for nothing Repubs on the spot.
Medical Insurance Rate Authority = MIRA, or Spanish for “Look!”
I am highly amused.
Use the CPUC and its rate regulation, or the CA insurance commissioner, for models. (I work at a CA utility – we so don’t want to get on the wrong side of the CPUC.) DiFi should know what they’re like.
Then turn voting machine regulation over to something built on the Nevada Gaming Commission, which regulates (among other things) slot machines and video gambling.
Feinstein is a republican, in the mold of Carly Fiorina.
But really, both parties are worthless and we are fucked.
I’m sure Richard Blum is already heavily invested in whatever the outcome might be for her proposal. She rarely moves so quickly on anything anymore unless there’s a profit motive for hubby.
The bill would create a national Medical Insurance Rate Authority, which would be able to prevent such increases.
This should be enacted tomorrow.
and made retroactive to the fullest extent possible.
Whooooo heeeeeeeeeee! Sister Diane has pricked a boil.
Just wait for all the states righters, that would be secessionist tea bagging racists to push back on this.
Sure – only one regulator to “buy.”
I’m not thrilled about this proposal considering how well as this sort of thing has worked as regards the SEC or any other body who pretended to regulate Wall Street vis-a-vis Madoff.
Didn’t happen. Bad result.
If Feinstein’s name is on it, I can’t shake that itchy feeling that we are about to be swindled.
Sister Diane has pricked a boil.
phew – I’m glad you didn’t get those words reversed.
It’s always been my belief that DiFi isn’t really a Democrat, she just plays one on T.V- so I would check the fine print on the proposal. But at least it lets us know that she knows that regulating the insurance industry might get her some airtime.
Sounds like cover for bad medical insurance. We have a state insurance commissioner that has not stopped gouging and other ways of preventing people from getting medical attention. Not buying this pig in a poke.
maybe, just maybe Difi wants to go out with something positive on her rap sheet.
.
.
.
never mind
Yeah, sadly I’m always questioning the motives of people like her and the timing of said announcement. Could it be a way to rile up repukes and teabaggers to get them to start up again with their “Death Panels and gov’t wants to kill grandma” chants and misinformation campaign again? These things always tend to have a way of backfiring on democrats and repukes are masters at exploiting and scaring people using lies.
Let’s see here, anyone have an alternative other than cynicism? Gosh, wringing our hands may feel good and reduce anxiety, doesn’t do much to solve anything.
You posted as many alternatives as anyone else. Thank you.
As President
Barack ObamaRonald Reagan (Damn, I keep getting them mixed up) said, “Trust, but verify.”On this score, DiFi is not just sorely lacking, she is downright scandalous.
Sorry, Kelly, you don’t get to hit and run. That is intellectually dishonest. My comment was a process comment as to what was being posted. It was not one of criticism of the administration or DiFi’s proposal. I have grown quite weary of the constant, constant criticism without any viable solution proposed. Now, if all FDL is, is a place to cathart and vent, well, I guess it serves that purpose well.
You don’t get to hit and run either, if the rule applies to you as well as others.
Please posit a solution. Thank you.
O and my solution BTW?
Pass the House bill, without Stupak. It’s doable.
Edward Teller’s diary is promoted to the front page!
Down Syndrome Victor Andrea Fay Friedman Eloquently Rebukes Palin
i trust my state regulators far and away more than the federal regulators even with a dem administration. put the republicans back in charge and if they’re anything like the last bush administration, this is what we can expect to happen to any fed regulation that exists:
http://www.papolicyblog.com/pablog/chainsaw.jpg
LOL
In respect. In my view it is only with national standards that we have any hope of fair and eventually comprehensive coverage. States rights in so many arenas, not just health care, is w hat’s killing this democracy if not the whole culture.
She is a piece of work. owned by the MIC. She wants to make a way for insurance to get cover while doing biz as usual.And get some nice donations to campaign funds.
Another pol trying to save face as health care reform goes down in flames.
Is this what was meant by ‘Transparency’ way back when?
Everybody in Kabuki!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xOeOIZvHgE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYHNRu3apG8
Rayne has treats, upstairs!
FDL Cutting Room Roundup: Saturday Evening Video
Yep you know the her plan will have a company control by Dick.
Very hard to make the case that State Insurance regulators should be trusted to determine whether rate increases are justified when regulators in the biggest state in the union are helpless to control gross rate increases of 39% for no rational reason.
It should not go unnoticed that these rate increases are being proposed while there is currently a Democrat in the WH as well as majorities in Congress with nary a peep from Obama about this.
I’m all for local control of insurance cartels and all businesses generally but when the federal government is willing to pitch in where a state vacuum exists I am all for that also. Why look a gift horse in the mouth.
Is this another dodge to avoid a public option?
Radical moderate? I can’t read any further.
Me too. My head spun around three times, especially when reading on provided no clue as to whether it was meant facetiously, or for real. I think it was just sarcasm cuz of how she basks in a far-far-left reputation, but like babs boxer, is a dead-eyed corporatist aristocrat who talks like a blue dog, maybe worse, and is never called out for it. She should be sharing Blanche Lincoln’s aura of disgrace–but then, she’s not from the South.
Governor of Washington, live on C-Span right now, said with a clear-eyed Girl Scout look on her face, as if it goes without saying, “This isn’t about insurance reform, it’s about reforming health care.” What does a cart need with a horse anyway?