How do we reform health care quick and dirty?
Well, maybe we could free the “free markets” for health insurance in this country. What do I mean by that? Simple: Remove the antitrust exemption health insurance companies (like Major League Baseball) currently enjoy under our laws.
Inexplicably, the health insurance industry has enjoyed an exemption from the federal antitrust laws. The exemption was enacted by Congress in 1945 and has long outlived any utility. Indeed, health insurers cannot point to any type of procompetitive conduct that they are able to engage in because of the exemption. Exemptions to the antitrust laws are rare and indeed only insurance and baseball have an antitrust exemption. […]
Antitrust exemptions are extraordinary and have typically been permitted only where industries demonstrate some compelling market failure to make the exemption necessary. The burden of preserving the exemption should be placed on the health insurance industry and to date they have failed to present a single justification for the exemption.
Isn’t this the classic conservative “I heart Capitalism” solution? So one would assume that Republicans would be pushing this idea, right? And if you believe that I have a great price on a bridge in Brooklyn I’d love to offer you.
No, the people who are proposing the elimination of this outdated antitrust exemption for health insurers are Representatives Perriello of Virginia and Markey of Colorado, two Democrats. Here’s the link to the announcement regarding the proposed legislation:
WASHINGTON—Congressman Tom Perriello and Congresswoman Betsy Markey will introduce legislation this week that will repeal the special anti-trust exemption for health insurance companies and medical malpractice insurance companies. The measure would end special treatment for the insurance industry that allows them to fix prices, collude with each other, and set their own markets without fear of being investigated. Removing this exemption has been a common priority of these two freshmen lawmakers, though they voted differently on the initial House health care reform bill.
“It’s time for Washington to decide whether we stand with patients or profiteering, whether we believe in market competition or a collusion between politicians and insurance monopolies. It’s time to end the monopoly protections that Washington has protected for decades as prices skyrocketed. It’s time for a simple, clean bill – no carve-outs or special deals – that forces insurance companies to compete. It’s time to put patients and cost relief first,” said Rep. Perriello. “Americans deserve to know who stands with them against the price gouging of middle-class and working-class folks. Today, we do.”
“I’ve heard from tens of thousands of Coloradans across my district, and though people’s opinions may vary, the common message is clear: the current health care system is crushing our families and businesses,” said Rep. Markey. “Support for removing this unfair exemption cuts across party lines, and is a major piece of common ground that I’ve been working toward in our country’s health care debate. This is about bringing sorely-needed competition back into an industry that has for too long wielded monopoly control over hard-working American families.”
Under the Perriello-Markey bill, health insurers will no longer be protected from liability for price fixing, dividing up market territories, or bid rigging. In the last 14 years, there have been 400 mergers among health care insurers so that 95% of health insurance markets are “highly concentrated,” which means consumers have little or no choice between insurers. This non-competitive market has played a role in health insurance premiums having more than doubled in the past decade.
The claim being made is that there is “bi-partisan” support for this measure, and maybe there is — in the House. But, assuming this bill or something similar passes the House of Representatives (not a given since many congresspersons are beholden to the insurance lobby as we’ve discovered over the past year), what do you think the odds of this “pro-competitive” measure passing the Senate with any Republican votes? Yes, I agree: slim and none, and Slim would no doubt leave the Senate far in advance of any vote.
Still, I suppose it will make a nice little nugget for Congress Critters who vote for it to run on during their re-election campaigns this Fall.*
* Forgive me if I sound cynical. I (and you, too) have good reason.
