Axelrod Blitzed on Health Care Competition

Wolf Blitzer swerved into the truth about breaking down barriers to the insurance companies to complete across state lines.  Interesting stuff.

As Axelrod said, this is not endemic to the kind of reforms that we’re proposing…. 

Of course, this is just my opinion.

Rob’s Rant

Advertisements

6 Responses

  1. Insurance companies being able to compete across state lines isn’t extremely helpful. Assuming that it could be implemented immediately, which is doubtful, it would provide competition in a handful of states where today there is little competition. Alabama is one of those states.

    If a company were to cross state lines to compete, which state’s rules would apply to consumer protection. The originating state or the new market’s state? If it is the new market state, then how is that different than a company expanding into a new state today?

    How does this achieve any of the goals of providing you with ownership and rights to the policy you pay for? Today, if you ever have to change employment you run the risk of being turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

    How does this insure the vast majority of the 46 million uninsured, most of whom are the employed poor?

    • Insurance companies being able to compete across state lines isn’t extremely helpful. Assuming that it could be implemented immediately, which is doubtful, it would provide competition in a handful of states where today there is little competition. Alabama is one of those states.

      The whole idea of the video was that Axelrod was not interested in pursuing that option. He never answered the question because he either had no answer or didn’t want tp pursue the line of questioning. Smart on his part, but not upfront.

      If a company were to cross state lines to compete, which state’s rules would apply to consumer protection. The originating state or the new market’s state? If it is the new market state, then how is that different than a company expanding into a new state today?

      I have no idea. I didn’t present any ideas, but I do think it should be pursued as an option. Would it be a good one? I have no idea. How about the state that the company is based in or a federal law governing this type of business? Just my ramblings, but if we are bringing all these other ideas to the table, why not this one?

      How does this achieve any of the goals of providing you with ownership and rights to the policy you pay for? Today, if you ever have to change employment you run the risk of being turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

      That is all true, but insurance companies are in the business of making money. I don’t trust the government to give me some type of ability to take control of my health care options. I have no idea where this comment really came from on your part, but it really doesn’t address my question on why Axelrod avoided the question from Blitzer.

      How does this insure the vast majority of the 46 million uninsured, most of whom are the employed poor?

      Why are we over hauling a system that the majority of Americans have very little problem with for the sake of this mythical 46 million. There are no where near that many that are really uninsured and I would contend that many are at the point because of choice (young, don’t want to pay for coverage, etc.) We’ve discussed this in a previous post.

      What we should be doing is finding real ways to lower the cost of insurance to small businesses and individuals – not a governmental or pseudo-governmental solution. I’ve asked several times for you provide an example where the government does things more efficiently as the private sector. I know the answer: none. The private sector is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but most of our problems stem from governmental involvement and over regulation. This over regulation also drives up the cost of doing business. Competition is a huge motivating factor.

  2. Because of the diligence of caring people, like yourself, nothing can truly be hidden from the eyes of the people. Keep up the great work and keen research. Appreciated much.

  3. The position you present, which is Insurance companies working across state lines is already in Obama’s program. It is called Exchanges. You join an exchange that operates across state lines, and they buy insurance at low prices. Where’s the news value in your post?

    There is a big difference passing a law that says insurance companies can’t discriminate, can’t turn you down, and can’t refuse you benefits and your single minded focus on distrust of the government.

    I can point out what you miss. Your quote mistrust un-quote of the government is entirely selective and therefore open to the charge of hypocrisy. You trust them just fine sifting through everyone’s phone calls, but not to come up with a bill that protects your rights with insurance companies?

    Come on, that is absolutely ridiculous.

  4. The position you present, which is Insurance companies working across state lines is already in Obama’s program. It is called Exchanges. You join an exchange that operates across state lines, and they buy insurance at low prices.

    Then why did Axelrod deflect this? If it is just semantics, then he should have said so. This was the subject of the post.

    Where’s the news value in your post?

    We’ve dealt with this before but this is not a news site. This is an opinion site based on my opinion of specific news events. If it were a news site I would have been posting massive amounts of material and answering comments WHILE out of town on business. As you can see, this did not happen.

    You trust them just fine sifting through everyone’s phone calls, but not to come up with a bill that protects your rights with insurance companies?

    I’m sure you will be able to point out where I have boasted about the government sifting through phone calls being a great program. Either way, this is like comparing apples and oranges. One takes a massive amount of our economy and transforms it and the other is a security issue. Where is the parallel here? Sorry if I don’t follow the lefty talking points.

    Also, who will protect us from the government?

  5. The ‘news’ value isn’t always instant, daily, or current news. It was meant to ask what new perspective does the post bring. If it brings no new perspective, is it worthy? I don’t mean that in a derogatory sort of way. Just asking what is the value.

    One of your other comments is the “mythical 46 million.” I think you, or conservatives in general, do a huge disservice to people who work, but cannot afford insurance. These are real, and hard working Americans. Those are the 46 Million.

    The 46 million does not include children, the elderly, or illegals. It includes the number of people who are 18-64 who presently do not have insurance.

    Take a family of 4, whose parents make under $50,000. A catastrophic plan would cost them $500/month. That is $500 that they don’t have. Since Jan 19, 2001, the cost of gasoline and heating fuel has gone from 98 cents to almost $3 per gallon.

    The 46 Million includes everyone who works at WalMart and almost every restaurant in America. These are the working poor that you are denying.

    I listened to the interview again and contrary to your opinion, Axerlrod did not, as you put it “deflect this.” This in this case being the question Wolf asked, which was “Why won’t Obama support allow insurance companies compete Nationally.” Axlerod stated that the President did not feel that that solution would accomplish his goals, just as I posted above.

    Far from evading or deflecting he answered Wolf.

    The government isn’t going to run a health care company. It is going to run a health care payer program. It will either carry the risk, or allow companies to bid for the risk. An excellent model is to sell the risk as bonds.

    You have to admit: 46 million poor Americans get health care, you get the benefit of never losing your coverage, and not a single dime in additional cost to the deficit. What’s your complaint to that?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: