Should health insurance companies be allowed to cross state lines?

[Masterhawk]

The main problem caused by preventing insurance companies from crossing state lines is that you may be stuck with terrible insurance in one state while in others, there are only a few options and it could create monopolies.

 

[ajn678]

Another issue is that health care doesn't cost the same across the country. So even if you could buy it across state lines, they would most likely be charging you higher amounts like we are seeing now anyways.

 

[Cephus]

Of course. Anyone should be able to do business anywhere they want, so long as they follow local laws and regulations.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

Some states do offer insurance companies the option to sell across state lines, no has taken that offer.

 

[reinoe]

Not just no but hell no. I cannot wrap my mind around why "purchasing across state lines" is a thing people seriously talk about. Just as well to talk about building a ladder to the moon.

 

[SocialD]

The main problem caused by preventing insurance companies from crossing state lines is that you may be stuck with terrible insurance in one state while in others, there are only a few options and it could create monopolies.

A lot of states its practically a monopoly now. Without insurance through my provider I have options from one insurance company is all.
More competition will give people more options, the insurance companies with more of what the consumer wants, whether that's price, ease of use, quality etc.. will flourish and the poorer performing ones will wither.

 

[sangha]

The main problem caused by preventing insurance companies from crossing state lines is that you may be stuck with terrible insurance in one state while in others, there are only a few options and it could create monopolies.

And the problem with allowing the sale of insurance across state lines is it makes no sense.

Imagine two fictional states. The first, West Rightwingia, has low health care costs (per person) and commensurately low premiums. The second, Libtardia, has high health care costs (per person) and commensurately high premiums.

Why in the world would an insurer in W Rightwingia want to sell insurance, at W Rightwingias low price, to people in Libtardia where the costs are high?

And conversely, why would people in W Rightwing want to buy the more expensive insurance sold by insurers in Libtardia?

 

[Greenbeard]

Of course. Anyone should be able to do business anywhere they want, so long as they follow local laws and regulations.

By that definition they can cross state lines now.

Across-state-lines proposals focus on letting them do so without following local laws and regulations.

 

[radcen]

Of course they should, and it makes absolutely no sense that they cannot.

Auto and home and life insurance is sold by national companies across state lines all the time. People are covered when they travel per the conditions of their policy, which is what happens now anyway. They still have to abide by state laws for selling in that particular state, and they do. There need be nothing unique about health insurance, other than the *what*. There's no legitimate reason health insurance cannot do the same.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

Of course. Anyone should be able to do business anywhere they want, so long as they follow local laws and regulations.

They can't sell anywhere because the local laws prevent it.

 

[radcen]

They can't sell anywhere because the local laws prevent it.

Hence the title and purpose of the thread: Should health insurance companies be allowed to cross state lines?

 

[Greenbeard]

Hence the title and purpose of the thread: Should health insurance companies be allowed to cross state lines?

What is that meant to mean exactly? Insurers enter and exit new markets all the time. The news in the past three years has been full of stories about Insurer X entering this or that state, and Insurer Y pulling out of this or that state. The catch is that they have to obey the rules of the states in which they decide to operate.

A few years ago the ACA provided start-up loans for new non-profit insurers. The one in Maine in particular was successful early on. So successful that they decided to expand their business into New Hampshire and sell there as well (they've since pulled back to focus on their Maine business).

So insurers can decide to go sell in another state and expand competition there now. What exactly are you asking?

 

[AliHajiSheik]

Hence the title and purpose of the thread: Should health insurance companies be allowed to cross state lines?

Don't ask me, ask the person I replied to who didn't seem to have read the title.

 

[ttwtt78640]

And the problem with allowing the sale of insurance across state lines is it makes no sense.

Imagine two fictional states. The first, West Rightwingia, has low health care costs (per person) and commensurately low premiums. The second, Libtardia, has high health care costs (per person) and commensurately high premiums.

Why in the world would an insurer in W Rightwingia want to sell insurance, at W Rightwingias low price, to people in Libtardia where the costs are high?

And conversely, why would people in W Rightwing want to buy the more expensive insurance sold by insurers in Libtardia?

That assumes that a policy would not be priced based on zip code among other actuarial risk factors. Other forms of insurance are sold across state lines now.

 

[Gaius46]

And the problem with allowing the sale of insurance across state lines is it makes no sense.

Imagine two fictional states. The first, West Rightwingia, has low health care costs (per person) and commensurately low premiums. The second, Libtardia, has high health care costs (per person) and commensurately high premiums.

Why in the world would an insurer in W Rightwingia want to sell insurance, at W Rightwingias low price, to people in Libtardia where the costs are high?

And conversely, why would people in W Rightwing want to buy the more expensive insurance sold by insurers in Libtardia?

Of course they wouldn't but that's a decision based on market economics. As I understand it now they can't because of legal restrictions. Horse of a different color.

 

[ttwtt78640]

A lot of states its practically a monopoly now. Without insurance through my provider I have options from one insurance company is all.
More competition will give people more options, the insurance companies with more of what the consumer wants, whether that's price, ease of use, quality etc.. will flourish and the poorer performing ones will wither.

That "more options" is precisely what PPACA did away with - all "qualified" medical care insurance must cover what the federal law mandates and include what the federal law deems necessary to be covered at no added out of pocket cost.

 

[Cephus]

They can't sell anywhere because the local laws prevent it.

A lot of local laws are protectionist. They are intended to protect local businesses.

 

[sookster]

More competition will drive health insurance costs down.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Some states do offer insurance companies the option to sell across state lines, no has taken that offer.

Exactly because an insurer must develop a network of providers in any state it sells insurance in and that is the obstacle to selling insurance across state lines. I am fine with allowing it, but it will accomplish absolutely nothing.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

More competition will drive health insurance costs down.

How? Its the providers charging exorbitant prices that are the reason why health insurance is expensive. BCBS and Humana are not raping you on costs, its your cardiologist, anesthesiologist, and orthopedic surgeons that are. Your health insurance premiums are just a reflection of that.

 

[earthworm]

A VERY sarcastic NO ..that this question should even be asked !
Lets limit EVERY business in the same manner .. and see how long it takes to bankrupt our nation !
In a way, before the EU , this was the Europeans problem .

 

[earthworm]

In that case , the entire health care system should be under legal umbrella of Medicare who can then control the costs .. more or less .. they can and should do a much better job .

 

[Absentglare]

The main problem caused by preventing insurance companies from crossing state lines is that you may be stuck with terrible insurance in one state while in others, there are only a few options and it could create monopolies.

They already can cross state lines. They generally don't want to because there are different laws and different healthcare providers to negotiate with in each state.

The "across state lines" republicans love is really about undermining laws and regulations at the state level so that insurers can more easily sell across state lines.

And, keep in mind, there's basically nothing to gain by doing it.

 

[Absentglare]

A lot of states its practically a monopoly now. Without insurance through my provider I have options from one insurance company is all.
More competition will give people more options, the insurance companies with more of what the consumer wants, whether that's price, ease of use, quality etc.. will flourish and the poorer performing ones will wither.

That's about the number of insurers, not state lines.

It wouldn't create more competition. In order for a health insurer to operate in your state, they still need to negotiate with huge networks of healthcare providers.

 

[Absentglare]

They can't sell anywhere because the local laws prevent it.

Yes, because each state has its own laws.

If you're going to take away state sovereignty at the federal level, you have to replace all the purposes of all those that are being federally smashed for no discernible gain.