From: gray asphalt on

"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)> wrote in message
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:17:02 -0400, "Kommienezuspadt"
> <NoSpam(a)> wrote:
>>I have yet to see one Repub say he supports repealing the law -- have you?
> The insurence industry would love to become federally regulated
> instead of having to deal with 50 different state regulatory agencies.
> In addition, there are some federal laws regulating the health
> insurance business with COBRA and HIPAA being the most well-known.
> I'm in favor of people being able to buy insurance out of state which
> would automatically bring health insurance under all federal laws
> including anti-trust laws.
> This is all complete bullshit because the purpose of the 1945 law was
> to give states the power to regulate insurance, not to exempt the
> industry from federal anti-trust legislation.

Where can we find a copy of the law? If you are right we
can all right off MSNBC, if we haven't already.

From: gray asphalt on

"Frank Ketchum" <nospam(a)> wrote in message
> "Kommienezuspadt" <NoSpam(a)> wrote in message
> news:4ad86a2b$0$24351$882e0bbb(a)
>> I'm a capitalist -- have been for 37+ years --- but I heard the other
>> day that the insurance industry takes in over 200 billion dollars in
>> profits & overhead out of health care every year. Imagine that amount --
>> it is over twice what is being planned for giving coverage in the plans
>> floating around.
>> As for why now? I suspect it is partly fueled by anger over the insurance
>> industry using half truths with a purposely flawed study to try to keep a
>> strangle hold on their profits.
>> I keep waiting for the free market types to defend this protection -- but
>> so far I've only gotten insults from them -- must be they have not
>> received their orders.
> You keep waiting for free market types to defend what? The anti trust
> laws for insurance?
> Free market types do not believe in anti trust laws so you won't find any
> defending it.
> And you claim you are a capitalist but not a free market type? Amusing.

Thanks. That's what I was trying to say.

From: gray asphalt on

"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)> wrote in message
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:40:04 -0700, "gray asphalt"
> <dontwrite(a)> wrote:
>>What about the anti-trust exemption?
> Federal anti-trust legislation covers all businesses engaged in
> interstate commerce. Because health insurance companies are, by law,
> not allowed to engage in interstate business they are exempt from
> federal antitrust laws. However, state regulators have laws against
> anti-competitive practices.
> Actually, if the insurance industry were allowed to sell insurance
> anywhere in the US they would lose their exemption from federal
> antitrust laws. This is something that the industry would welcome.
> However, in states where regulations have driven most of the companies
> away, you can have only 5 or 6 companies left selling health
> insurance. When the number of companies gets low, it's easier for
> them to collude with each other.
> This can cause problems for the physicians as well. If you have two
> companies controlling over two thirds of the business, it's almost
> impossible for the doctors not to join these network. The doctors
> have to take what these companies offer.
I hope this aspect gets really looked at. You seem to be
an important part of the discussion. I'm not sure if your
information is rationalization bs or truth. It will be interesting
and game changing for me.

From: Carbon on
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:23:58 -0400, Frank Ketchum wrote:
> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)> wrote in message
> news:4ad9af97$0$5077$9a6e19ea(a)
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:41:07 -0700, gray asphalt wrote:
>>> The health insurance industry, along with major league baseball, are
>>> the only two industries in the United States with an anti-trust
>>> exemption.
>> All you free market libertarians must think this is wrong, correct?
> Correct. What is your point?

My point is that the libertarians here go on and on about the magical
properties of free-market capitalism as it applies to big healthcare,
when in fact big healthcare is completely free to game the system at no
risk to itself. Obviously there is no legitimate competition in the US
healthcare system. It's a cartel.
From: Howard Brazee on
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 21:57:12 -0400, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)>

>This can cause problems for the physicians as well. If you have two
>companies controlling over two thirds of the business, it's almost
>impossible for the doctors not to join these network. The doctors
>have to take what these companies offer.

An example is comparing the number of physicians that accept Medicare
and those who don't.

On the other hand, it may be compared to having companies such as
Fannie Mae controlling home mortgages - but not really.

"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison