Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (2400)	10/27/2007 3:06:29 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

You can flatten the playing field without removing competition. The regulatory onus would be on the Feds, not on 50 different state jurisdiction to map out what minimum coverage constitutes. Then it's up to the competitors to color it in between the lines, and to compete on service and details of product offerings. A good model of this is the current Medicare advantage programs which are regulated nationwide by a single body (and which most conservatives consider a beacon of how private firms should compete). However the rules of coverage and guidelines for utilization review all come from the Feds, they aren't the "make 'em up as you go" rules that most local plans operate under today. Single payor is just that. Bills submitted to (and most importantly, paid by) a single overarching fiduciary.