|
medpundit |
||
 |
 |
|
Saturday, January 24, 2004Cannon thinks there's a better idea: reviving an old bill by Kentucky Republican representative Ernie Fletcher (who is now his state's governor) to let people buy insurance from any other state — and thus, at the same time, buy that state's regulatory regime. If you don't like the mandates in your state, you would be able to buy insurance from a state with less onerous regulations. If, on the other hand, it's really true that people would not want cheap no-frills health insurance, they may prefer to stay in high-mandate states. I think it's more likely that a choice-based approach would exert pressure against state overregulation. The AHP bill, on the other hand, might increase the pressure for federal regulation. It is true that a choice-of-law policy would, in a sense, give up the cost advantages of creating a national pool. But a national pool could in theory emerge anyway if the market evolved that way. (If some state, for example, became what Delaware is for the law of corporate chartering.) So bring back Fletcher's bill. It would be good for health care, and it could be a model for deregulation in the future. posted by Sydney on 1/24/2004 12:21:00 AM 0 comments 0 Comments: |
|
