IIRC before Obamacare everyone had health care. Even those that crossed the border illegally could walk into any hospital and get health care. Of course those who had insurance actually paid for those that didn't in radically inflated prices charged by the hospitals. A small box of tissues priced at $0.59 at the grocery store would cost the insurance company $35.00. A face cloth 47.95. and a Bath towel cost over $75.00. Instead of these prices being reduced by everyone having insurance they were increased.
The states closely guard their ability to regulate insurers of all types. All have complex laws. A nice simplification may be coming but will require a Fed agency to be sure the ins co's pay claims. Ins co's hate the claim paying part of their contract.
Can someone explain why, other than bureaucratic red tape, it's a non-issue for car insurance companies to cross state lines but a huge deal for health insurance companies?
I think fixing healthcare is a fairly straightforward process.
1) Health insurance companies allowed to compete nationally just like car insurance.
2) Medical facilities (everything from hospitals to doctor offices to pharmacies) must have a set price for an item. That price cannot change based on who is paying the bill. My mechanic doesn't charge me $2500, $800 to geico, $400 to allstate, and $199 to progressive for the same repair. He simply charges the cost of the repair.
3) Mandatory coverage to include "catastrophic care" defined as all procedures over a set dollar amount which will then be indexed to inflation, annual well check-ups, and immunizations. Everything else can be added/removed just like car insurance (want prescription drug coverage, that'll be $5/mo).
4) Insurers may not drop someones coverage because their health changed.
5) If a covered medical condition develops while a person has health insurance and that person does not go longer than 6 months without health insurance then insurance companies must continue to cover the condition and may not consider it a "pre-existing condition" for rate / coverage considerations, even if the individual changes insurance companies.
#1-4 I think are the reasonable to ensure maximum coverage at minimal cost without risking people losing their house because of their health. #5 is the carrot to convince people to maintain health insurance coverage even when they think they don't need it. An alternative to the government mandating you buy something simply for existing.
It's a very big issue for car ins cos to do business in all/most states. TX banned Allstate for years. Got to follow all the rules and they vary a lot. Some states are no-fault which turns it upside down.
It's not really health insurance when you require companies to ignore pre-existing conditions and keep popular things like 26 year olds on mama's policy. No way they can price these sort of things with any accuracy. Gov will have to step in and keep the ins cos subsidized with tax/borrowed money.
It will all get sorted out when the socialists take over. Bernie did pretty good, just wait a few years when the free-stuff folks get to voting age.
Fix EMTALA and fix the tort system. If losers had to pay for frivolous litigation health costs would decrease.
Also Medicare is nothing but a price fixing scheme. They're the biggest payor so they set the prices. If Medicare doesn't pay it then UHC or BCBS sure won't either. And guess who sets Medicare's prices?