Democrats take aim at healthcare bill provision

[TomCADem]

Source: LA Times

Proposals before Congress to allow insurance companies to market and sell healthcare policies nationwide are coming under attack from proponents of the current system of state-by-state oversight.

A key but lesser-known facet of the healthcare bills in the House and Senate would allow insurers to register in one state but sell policies in many other states as well.

That could allow insurers to ignore insurance laws in all but their home state and make it impossible for regulators in states with tough consumer protection laws to enforce them, a group of Democratic lawmakers says in a letter obtained by The Times.

Thirty-one House Democrats -- including 29 Californians -- are urging congressional leaders in the letter to abandon the provisions they say would gut hard-fought laws that protect consumers against insurer misdeeds in 17 states.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-health-insure17-2009dec17,0,2204157.story

---

I still believe in health care reform if we can get this junk out.

[PSPS]

1. I agree. This turns insurance companies into credit card companies.

Credit card companies register their PO box in a no-usury-laws state and, thanks to federal regulations, other states they operate in can't do anything about it. These similar provisions for the health insurance racket amounts to the same thing. Instead of having to buy off 50 state legislatures, the crooks can just get what they want with what they've already bribed the US congress with plus one state legislature wherever they register their PO box.

I don't think a bush-junta white house/congress could have come up with a worse bill than this has turned into.

[kayla9170]

2. This is a start to a real fight to get

HCR to a better bill. We have great Health Care Mandates in Michigan in comparsion to other states like California....trust me when I say it, California health care is a WRECK. I would not want California style HC in Michigan, that is for sure. The Federal Government has no right IMHO to take away my state rights in the regulation of Michigan health care.

THIS IS A POINT WERE WE CAN START A GOOD FIGHT!! PITCHFOLK READY HERE :)!

[Lasher]

3. Sheesh, I didn't think that crap made it into the bill.

Individual mandate, taxing employee/retiree medical benefits, now this. Is there anything bad that isn't included now and is there anything good that's survived?

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. Perhaps a slow deliberative process if better that ramming a bill through Congress

[yurbud]

6. if the intent is bad, it doesn't matter how long it takes. If it good, it doesn't matter how fast

[groundloop]

5. Why not a single, nationwide set of rules?

I agree that states with good oversight of the insurance industry shouldn't have their laws usurped by this. However, wouldn't it make more sense to have a single set of rules nationwide with tough oversight of the insurance industry? In a way it would make it easier on them to only have one set of regulations to follow instead of 50.

[David Zephyr]

7. Democrats Take Aim at Healthcare Bill Provision

Source: Los Angeles Times

Proposals before Congress to allow insurance companies to market and sell healthcare policies nationwide are coming under attack from proponents of the current system of state-by-state oversight.

A key but lesser-known facet of the healthcare bills in the House and Senate would allow insurers to register in one state but sell policies in many other states as well.

That could allow insurers to ignore insurance laws in all but their home state and make it impossible for regulators in states with tough consumer protection laws to enforce them, a group of Democratic lawmakers says in a letter obtained by The Times.

Consumers in California and some other states, for instance, could lose the ability to appeal treatment denials by insurers to panels of outside expert physicians, critics said. They also warned that policyholders could risk losing the protection of state laws that require insurance companies to pay for a wide range of treatments, including HIV testing and reconstructive surgery for breast cancer patients.


Read more: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-health-insure17-2009dec17,0,2204157.story

---

Please pass this article on to your friends and loved ones about this monstrous provision within the current health care bill.

This needs to be stopped.

[MNDemNY]

8. Do you want your Health care regulated by...TEXAS????

How are those Delaware based Credit cards treating you???

[Laelth]

9. Amen! This bill needs to go down in flames. It's worse than doing nothing.

:dem:

-Laelth

[tomm2thumbs]

10. this legislation is turning more sour the more folks read it - the 'read the bill' folks are right

We put our trust in our Democratic representatives and they shit all over us because their lobbyist lunch buddies have more power over them than the voters who put them in office. Call. Write. Call. Write. At least you'll know you are being heard, even if you don't get lunch out of it.

[debbierlus]

14. Why the hell do you think there is a mad rush to get this passed before Christmas?

Only problem is that the progressive base that they used and abused to get elected is paying close attention, and with the availability of the internet to update developments almost by the minute, we figured it out.

[tomm2thumbs]

16. maybe Obama should read the bill - if Lieberman will let him

I keep forgetting, now which one is President again?

[FBaggins]

11. This is what happened to credit card usury laws

That could allow insurers to ignore insurance laws in all but their home state and make it impossible for regulators in states with tough consumer protection laws to enforce them

Seen posts about 29.9% credit card rates (even with a decent payment history)?

It wouldn't be legal in most states today... if it weren't for the slow creep to nationwide banks (not that that's necessarily a problem in itself... just that the effect in this case is a concern).

I don't have any problem with trying to create more competition (especially if there is no public option) by letting them operate across state lines, but there either needs to be a requirement regarding state laws, or there needs to be an agreement on federal guidelines that mimic some of those tougher states.

[Zodiak]

12. Jesus...this was a REPUBLICAN idea!

I knew that they wanted companies to sell across state lines so they could set up a single red state to house all of these companies. Playing to the lowest common denominator.

And the DEMOCRATS put this in the bill?

Betrayal of the American people by Democrats example #324.

[PassingFair]

15. They HAD to...we needed Lieberman's vote!

Something is better than nothing!

You must want the Republican team to win!

What about the 30 million people waiting for health care programs they can't afford!

How can you be so selfish and so Republican?



Do I need this: :sarcasm:

Didn't think so.....

[BadgerKid]

17. Single red state = easier to restrict health care.

I wonder if this could be used, for example, to place a lot more hoops in the way to a woman seeking an abortion.

[David Zephyr]

20. It was. And it's in the Democrats' bill. Who knew? Some did.

"Betrayal of the American people by Democrats example #324." Pretty sad.

[PA Democrat]

13. What a stinky turd of a bill.

One of Du's persistent cheerleaders of the fake reform bill claimed that insurers would have to abide by the regs of the policyholder's state. Look like they were wrong, not that I am surprised.

Recommended in an effort to dispel willful ignorance.

[slinkerwink]

18. This would fuck over good state regulation in some states.

[ramapo]

19. Like NJ

NJ has a coverage mandate. Insurance is expensive but at least we can get it.

I was hoping for some relief. Now I'm just hoping I don't get screwed any worse.