>>Actually, I have suggested that option although not here. The object is not to sell insurance across state lines. That's just a means to an end. The object is to allow people to buy insurance without being encumbered by their own state's regulations, specifically in the Cadillac regulation states.
There are some states like New York that require insurance sold there to include a panoply of benefits, everything under the sun. The result is that insurance there is dramatically more expensive than insurance sold in states without those requirements. If folks could buy insurance that had only what they wanted, it would be more affordable. And young invincibles could buy catastropic insurance, which is quite cheap.<<
I am all for the young, or anyone who thinks there's a benefit to it, having the choice to buy only catastrophic coverage and paying smaller premiums.
If you start allowing people in, say, California to buy insurance from any other state, though, I think the healthcare providers will end up having to hire even more people to keep up with billing, and to make sure that they are meeting all the various state's requirements.
"I'd like to see the doctor. I'm a new patient, and I need a colonoscopy."
"What type of insurance do you have?"
"Blue Cross."
"Blue Cross California, or Blue Cross from some other state?"
"Blue Cross Kentucky. Or as I like to call it, Blue Grass Blue Shield. Ha ha."
"Hmmm, well I don't think BC Kentucky covers colonoscopies. But maybe I'm thinking of Blue Cross Tennessee. Hold on a moment."
Perfect. That should reduce healthcare costs for everybody. Not. |
