Yes-23 » health insurance companies

Letter to Charles Gonzales, 20th Congressional District, TX

RodZ — Thu, 03 May 2012 02:03:36 +0000

The Honorable Charles Gonzalez

Dear Representative, it has been reported by Dylan Ratigan of MSNBC in the Huffington Post that health insurance companies are exempt from the Sherman anti-trust laws.

If this report is accurate and true why is this the case? You have stated you want fair and open competition but I fail to see how this can be accomplished if the insurance companies enjoy protection under the law from competing insurance companies.

I also understand from the report that Texas is one of the states that allows this to occur. Why aren’t you trying to have this law changed in order to lower the costs.

Are you so bent on a government option that you cannot support fair and open competition?

I think that Tort Reform and eliminating the exemption from the anti-trust laws would go along way to reforming health care and not cost us billions of dollars.

What is your position on this?

Thank you for your time

Possibly Related Posts:

Health Care Reform, Where’s the Reform

RodZ — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:28:40 +0000

I wonder what you think of the current progress towards health care reform. I think the health insurance companies are poised for record profits. I think the average citizen is poised to pay more in premium costs and much more in taxes and get less for it.
According to most of the Democrats, we are addressing a moral issue and we should gleefully pony up and pay for the less fortunate among us. If you disagree with this position you are an evil, greedy, selfish person and should be ashamed of yourself.
I wonder why those of us who currently enjoy a comfortable life complete with health coverage should have our benefits cut and our costs increased to implement a plan that will not ultimately provide quality care at a lower cost for the less fortunate among us.
I heard on the news over the weekend that, included in this bill is a tanning booth tax. The argument is that, “I should not have to pay for someone to get cancer from tanning”. On the surface this sounds reasonable, right? If you believe that you need to wake up! I am sure this single tax isn’t the only one in the bill. There are many seemly harmless little sections on preventative care that will probably affect each and everyone of us, either in a tax or mandatory participation in order to qualify for continuing coverage.
These seemingly harmless, “It is good for us,” provisions, are in reality “behavior modification” tools.
The government wants the overweight, the smokers and many other personal behaviors changed under the guise of health.
While in principle these are very good things for people to do, I think it infringes on personal freedoms. What is the trade off here?
As usual there are a few crumbs tossed to the taxpayers, such as the much touted, insurance companies cannot cancel or deny you coverage for pre-existing conditions and other small concessions but, the over all requirements of the House bill and Senate bill truly benefit the insurance companies and our representatives campaign coffers more than the public.
I have contended that I should not have to pay for a large government entitlement plan. I have been called just plain lucky because I was smart enough to get a plan that I could carry into retirement. One my liberal friends told me that he felt that I had an “I got mine to bad for you attitude”. He also said that at 20 years old he didn’t think that far ahead. I would ask him did you not think at 30, 40, 50 and now in your 60′s? Is it fair that I have to pay for him because he did not think he would ever get sick. Not much difference than the tanning bed position the liberals take is it?
I wonder about the exclusions two states get to the cost sharing of Medicaid. If this bill is so good why did these Democrats feel the need to protect their states citizens at the expense of the rest of us. I wonder why one Democratic Senator felt the need to have the anti-trust exemptions excluded from the bill. I feel this single change to current law would have cut insurance costs by half. This is just my opinion, but take a look at your auto insurance. How high would it be if State Farm had a monopoly in your state?
My liberal friends also tell me the bill will change as the process continues, they are right of course, it will get worse, cost more and insure fewer people.
These are just a few of my thoughts on the big insurance reform sell out. What are yours?

Possibly Related Posts:

Charles Gonzalez 20th District: Response to RodZ on Healthcare Anti-trust Repeal

RodZ — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 11:05:30 +0000

Here is the response from Representative Gonzalez concerning repeal of the anti-trust exemption for the insurance companies. It would have been nice to get a status of the bill. The summary states:

Official Summary

9/17/2009–Introduced.Health Insurance Industry Antitrust Enforcement Act of 2009 – Declares that nothing in the McCarran-Ferguson Act shall be construed to permit health insurance issuers or issuers of medical malpractice insurance to engage in any form of price fixing, bid rigging, or market allocations in connection with providing health insurance coverage or coverage for medical malpractice claims or actions. Makes this Act nonapplicable to any information gathering and rate setting activities of any state commission of insurance or any other state regulatory entity with authority to set insurance rates.

I am not sure how this addresses the facts Representative Gonzalez states in his letter to me or if it eliminates insurance companies from the acts protections. I do know that the act is addressed in the new house healthcare reform bill, but that is a blog for another day.

Dear Mr. Zagala:

Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 3596, the Health Insurance IndustryAntitrust Enforcement Act of 2009. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter.

As you know, federal antitrust laws were established to protect consumers. Antitrust laws ensure that markets are competitive by governing market behaviors such as price discrimination, predatory pricing, and monopolization. Throughout the current healthcare debate, concerns have been expressed about health insurance companies and how their exemption from antitrust laws might impact consumers.

It is clear that consumer choice and competition has been stymied by the rampant consolidation of the health care industry over the past decade (400 mergers have taken place in that time period). The American Medical Association has found that almost 95% of all markets are “highly concentrated.” Other reports support this by showing that two firms control at least 50% of the market in 39 states. Worse yet, single firms control over 75% of the market in nine states. This has not benefitted the consumer. Insurance premiums have increased more than 87% over the past six years. This is four times faster than average wages have increased. Meanwhile, the annual profits of the ten largest health insurers increased by 428% from 2000-2007 (from $2.4 billion to $12.9 billion). The consolidation of market control has not only hurt consumers; it has been found that doctors earn less in concentrated markets.

This lack of competition hurts consumers’ pocketbooks and health. H.R. 3596 aims to correct this situation by clarifying that health insurance companies and medical malpractice insurers are not exempt from federal antitrust laws. I am proud to cosponsor this legislation and will support its inclusion in any healthcare reform legislation that is considered in Congress.

Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about any legislation concern that is a priority for you.

Sincerely,

Charles A. Gonzalez
Member of Congress

Possibly Related Posts:

More Stimulus and Healthcare: Enough is Enough

RodZ — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:16:50 +0000

Wow! It is just amazing how complicated these issues are when our representatives try to fix a major business problem they don’t understand.

This confused and dazed group of lawmakers have added another TRILLION PLUS to the deficit without blinking an eye. Who will pay for this? The dollar is weaker everyday, so much so that gas prices are going up again. This time it is not a shortage of supply but a weak dollar.

I have liberal friends who say so what? Well I guess they are happy with the successful government programs we have to date. Hell medicare and medicaid are solvent, NOT. I can see no improvement to my health insurance because of this so called reform, in fact just the opposite will be true, higher cost and lower benefits. If you don’t believe me just listen to our queen of the house. Yes Nancy Pelosi has clearly stated her intent to the evil insurance companies.

We may not have a perfect health care system for everyone, but why screw up what we do have for millions of folks just to make sure a few uninsured get coverage. Why not write a bill to cover them and in the process remove a wonderful benefit the health insurance companies enjoy such as an exemption from anti-trust laws. They also could fix the law suit problem. Texas took care of that and it seems to be working. Why would Obama want a demo when he already has one in place?

Don’t forget the stimulus that they claim is saving and creating jobs. What a bunch of bull. In a previous post I gave you links to two government sites that told you how the money was to be spent and how much was being spent. I guess the leadership can take credit for saving some jobs and creating some government jobs but I would have to say bull.

This deficit is going to grow beyond anyones ability to pay it and this country will be bankrupt. Impact to me? I guess I’ll try to get a good spot for my tent in the park.

Possibly Related Posts: