Question of the Day | 09/29/2009 1:00 am
Are you for or against allowing consumers to buy health-care insurance across state lines? (Why or why not?)
© Shutterstock
4 Comments
110 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
Instead of trying to take our lives over why doesn’t the government start smaking the insurance companies? I don’t want the government involved in this aspect of our lives no way no how ….
In what way would having a public option available force you to have the government involved in your life? This makes absolutely no sense. No one would have been required to be involved.
Certainly insurance reform is important and is part of the solution, but it’s not the entire solution. The government can not require a person to insure someone. It can make the insurance companies play nice, but what will end up happening is that the insurance companies will be a little more choose-y about whom they’ll accept. So this will be no comfort to people who have pre-existing conditions or do not have jobs that allow access to medical insurance.
Everyone will be forced to be involved. Everyone will be told what they need to buy. Everybody will be controlled. A public option is a socialist take over has so many hidden agendas. It is pure evil, full of lies.
Reform yes, take over, no.
Monopolies smonopolies….. As someone who has worked in medical billing and insurance for nearly 2 decades — I am against crossing state lines. Why? Because "cheap" insurance from another is nearly impossiible to regulate across state lines… If your company is somewhere on the east coast and you live on the west coast, once you have a major denial you really have no where to turn for help or mediation. Your state regulator has no authority and if you think the insurance company’s home state authority will pay attention — well, toss the coin and see what happens. I have had many patients caught in this crossfire and you know who gets hurt — they do. These are your friends and neighbors and relatives and maybe some of you. So go on and on about about choice and getting to to see the entire smorgasbord of insurance opportunities —- but everyone needs to realize that once you cross that state line, you may not get what you paid for and were duly promised in your policy. Consider that this may have devasting consequences for you, your loved ones and your way of life. Better see who watchdogs that policy (and how well they do it) before you sign up.
Good point, Lauren. When getting insurance companies to pay out is already difficult to impossible within the state, just imagine the pointless struggle across state lines and regulators.
Only if there are reasonable, affordable provisions for people who get rejected by the for profit insurance companies (like me) as well as provisions for forcing the insurance companies to follow through on the promised coverage.
I have fibromyalgia and have been rejected coverage by several for profit insurance companies. My only option would have been to file for SSI disability, since I make too much money to qualify for public assistance. I chose not to do so as I am not fully disabled, I am able to work, I just cannot afford to have a $15000 deductible with a $1500 monthly premium which would have been all I could get from the SCHIP programs.
Blessedly, my husband found a job with a company that offers coverage to all employees and dependants, so I now have insurance instead of having to choose between disability and bankruptcy due to medical bills.
If you have never been denied coverage, you don’t understand how traumatizing it can be to have to choose between food on the table and medical care.
Here we are again, wondering if less regulation will solve our problems. History seems to mean nothing … again.
No, I am not for creating even more bureauocracy than we already have in order for the insurance companies to rake in more money than they are already doing.
Most people do not know that charges are set by regions. What is charged for a service in Paintsville, Ky is not the same as for Hartford, Ct. For instance, Kentucky has several regions of price points as set by Medicare. So, if this is going to happen, be prepared for the MD having to hire more people in his insurance dept. which only increases his already very high overhead costs.
I have so many questions about how insurance companies actually work, I
don’t know what to think. Am I correct that insurance companies
negotiate fees with hospitals and medical groups? If that’s true,
having coverage from a different state from where you receive your
treatment might be a reason insurance companies have shown no interest in crossing state lines.
I’m for the ability to buy insurance across state lines. In fact, I think that should be the corner stone for any health care reform. We don’t need to spend millions creating something the Federal government will mis-manage. We need to start with reforming insurance laws. It’s relatively easy and cost effective. Competition is good.
Trene, what is the difference between the government creating, managing and enforcing insurance laws, and the government managing healthcare itself? I don’t get how you fear mis-management by the government for healthcare reform, but then turn around and say the government should manage and reform insurance laws. What’s the difference? If they are bad at managing things, they must be bad at reforming and enforcing laws?
Having read the previous articles, which have lots of good information and opinions I had not heard before, I have to say that I am NOT in favor of allowing health insurance across state lines. Regulating across state lines would be a nightmare of bureaucracy, and raise indirect costs.
I am all for fair and honest competition, but I am also for state sovereignty in situations like this. Each state regulates health care according to it’s own priorities, sensibilities, and experience. If a health insurance company wants to do business in my state, then let them come in and set up shop. As long as the business they do in my state is bound by our regulations, and subject to our state taxes, and they can be sued in our state courts, then welcome. If I have to go to another state to face an arbitration panel, that is a big problem. If they are bound by the lesser standards of another state, that is a problem. If going across state lines brings them under weaker federal regulation, that is a problem. If they can come in and “game” our system, that is a problem.
It seems to me that crossing state lines is more about evading state laws and regulations than about fair competition. It does not represent more than a superficial fix to the deeper problems we currently face in our system of health care.
Minn. Sues Over Alleged Health Insurance FraudReally RJB? I don’t take vacations, have an ipod, eat out 3 times a week, and I’ve been on 2 vacations in the past 20 yr…I help support one young adult so he can raise his daughter, have another kid in college, a mother with alzhiemers, 2 other teenagers, and drive a 2001 model car with over 100,000 miles on it….and work 2 jobs to make sure I can help all these people and still pay my electric bill, while dealing with some serious health issues myself. I can’t afford to lose another 10-20% of my salary and just be able to cover the basics. BTW, with the exception of the last 6 months , over the last 7 years I have had various families living with me in order to help them get back on their feet. The first thing that will go will be my charitable contributions….kind of shooting ourselves in the foot if you ask me….I cannot give anymore than I already am. I’m tapped out. I need surgery on my c-spine and sacral spine, but cannot afford to take off work (even though I have long and short term disability) because of the decrease in income that would create. Not everyone in this country stating that we can’t afford this is living "high on the hog" as you imply. Although I do see quite a few people in the grocery store with food stamps sporting I-Phones, $150 tennis shoes (I got my last pair @ target), $80 jerseys and more jewelry than I’ve ever owned.
- Dear Margo: When Dad/Gramps Just Ain't Interested
- Could Mammograms Fall Victim to Obamacare? by Liz Peek
- Liz Smith: Sharon Stone, Steve Tyrell, Sarah (You Know Who), Glamour, Lesley Gore – and More!
- Queen Martha, by Cynthia McFadden
- LIZ SMITH FLASH! The Kennedy Conspiracy and the Mafia
- Remember shopping pre-Internet? What era/memory in the evolution of shopping do you think of most fondly?
- The Love Goddess: In Sickness and in Health ... But Hold the Sickness
- Let Down and Felt Up? by E.D. Hill
- The World in Vogue (Photos)
- Mr. wOw: Falling in Love Again With 'Marlene'
- Dear Margo: When Dad/Gramps Just Ain't Interested
- LIZ SMITH FLASH! The Kennedy Conspiracy and the Mafia
- Liz Smith: Sharon Stone, Steve Tyrell, Sarah (You Know Who), Glamour, Lesley Gore – and More!
- Queen Martha, by Cynthia McFadden
- Liz Smith Remembers the 'Good Old Days' of Department Stores
- Could Mammograms Fall Victim to Obamacare? by Liz Peek
- Remember shopping pre-Internet? What era/memory in the evolution of shopping do you think of most fondly?
- Mr. wOw: Falling in Love Again With 'Marlene'
- The Love Goddess: In Sickness and in Health ... But Hold the Sickness
- Caption This!
- Could Mammograms Fall Victim to Obamacare? by Liz Peek
- Dear Margo: When Dad/Gramps Just Ain't Interested
- Let Down and Felt Up? by E.D. Hill
- Remember shopping pre-Internet? What era/memory in the evolution of shopping do you think of most fondly?
- Mr. wOw: Falling in Love Again With 'Marlene'
- LIZ SMITH FLASH! The Kennedy Conspiracy and the Mafia
- The Love Goddess: In Sickness and in Health ... But Hold the Sickness
- Queen Martha, by Cynthia McFadden
- Liz Smith: Sharon Stone, Steve Tyrell, Sarah (You Know Who), Glamour, Lesley Gore – and More!
- The World in Vogue (Photos)
wOw Features
Reader Voices
Caption This!
Dear Margo: When Dad/Gramps Just Ain't Interested
