Including the repeal of the insurers' anti-trust exemption in the merged bill would be very useful.

[andym]

The House had it, the Senate did not. Did any of the Senators threaten to filibuster over its inclusion? If not, that is one regulation that would help make the bill better and is worth fighting for.

[depakid]

1. No doubt...

but that would offend the Senate's and the administration's new allies in the health insurance industry- and they're not bad people. ya know.

[rwheeler31]

3. No it would offend the insurance whores Nelson and Lieberman.

[ibegurpard]

2. lol

we're now discussing ways to make shit more palatable instead finding alternatives to shit

[rwheeler31]

4. We need to work on something positive and quit being

destructive.

[ClarkUSA]

5. Of course, but I doubt it'll happen. We need Blue Dog votes to pass HCR.

I have no doubt that in the years to come, many fixes will be voted on in every session, as Sen. Harkin promised when
he said last week on MSNBC (with a big grin on his face), "The public option is not dead. This is just the beginning."

[andym]

6. I expect that they will try to add a public option/Medicare expansion back using reconciliation

(not the current bill merger) sometime next year. I will strongly push for this as soon as the current bill is done.

[ClarkUSA]

7. I don't know, given that it's an election year but Sen. Harkin sure looked as if he had something...

.... up his sleeve. He was grinning like a kid who had gotten what he'd always wanted for Christmas.

I have no doubt that many of us will live to see HCR encompass a public option and someday, perhaps a
couple of decades from now, single-payer.

[ibegurpard]

8. your faith is so cute

[ClarkUSA]

10. Yeah, folks said the same thing when I put out my Obama 08 yard sign in Feb. 2007.

:)

[cornermouse]

14. That just means you were among the first to buy

a rather carefully constructed PR image. You probably even believe that a photographer just "happened" to pick the one person out of a crowd of part time state senators to capture a pictorial history of someone who would go on to be a junior senator for about 1/2 year before announcing his candidacy for president was nothing more than a happy coincidence. I don't think I would brag about that.

[AndyA]

9. The anti-trust issue needs to be addressed.

The health insurance industry is THE ONLY INDUSTRY with this protection. It must be removed. Period. There is no reason for it to exist, the companies are thriving as it is, and there is no competition in the industry, which is why it's been run like a ROMAN HOLIDAY the last few decades.

[dkf]

11. How is this exemption being used?

Any examples? Was there a legitimate purpose for it at one time? Would this pertain to the entire insurance industry or just health? Ack I wish I knew how big a deal this is.

[rwheeler31]

12. Anti trust measures are put in to avoid price fixing and

monopoly. Many states have little competition among insurers.

[dkf]

13. So this pertains to all lines of insurance then?

If we got rid of the exemption but there is still only one player in the market what happens under no exemption?

[andym]

15. They might be subject to being broken up by the Anti-Trust Division

of the Justice Dept like ATT. Whether that would really happen is anyone's guess.

[dkf]

16. Has anyone done a study on the effects of removing the exemption?

Ok, I'm researching and I found something but it looks like a disguised industry group which explains that the industry colludes on actuarial info to lower costs. HA!

http://www.openmarket.org/2009/12/15/removing-antitrust-exemption-wont-increase-healthcare-competition/

Its ironic that early reports on the Senate Bill talked about repeal of the McArran Ferguson act which let the states regulate insurance. There's nothing like that now.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/168475.php

[andym]

17. The CBO claimed it wouldn't save much money

in their analysis of the House bill. Google search found this:
http://www.property-casualty.com/Issues/2009/November-9-2009/Pages/CBO-Finds-No-Savings-From-Altering-Antitrust-Exemption.aspx

because "However, the CBO report added, “that effect is likely to be small because state laws already bar the activities that would be prohibited under federal law if this bill was enacted.”"

Hmm, sounds like the CBO analysis isn't very in depth, given how weakly many states enforce their insurance regulations.

[andym]

18. I think this is worth a call to ones Representatives. nt