Thread: BREAKING: First US City Set To For Complete Collapse Over Obamacare [VIDEO]

nntrixie, there is nothing about what the feds can or will do that prevents states from doing whatever they want to do under their own fraud, scam, unfair and deceptive trade practices laws. They can still regulate whatever way they want, except they can't ban under HR 1101, the right of people to buy insurance through business associations. The repeal of McCarran doesn't in anyway restrict states from their own state regulations. I've never heard of a state doing anything to insurance companies. Maybe they have and it just didn't make the news.

The value of McCarran isn't regulation, it's free market across state lines. What happened under McCarran was all the insurance companies created these little subsidiary companies operating within a state, not operating across state lines, to stay within the exemption of McCarran within a single state. That restricted the size of their pools, reduced the volume of policies and resulted in higher rates. It also resulted in conspiracies, collusion, industry wide deals, anti-competitive behavior and is not a good thing for such a large industry.

Take an automotive company. What is they were exempt from Sherman Anti-Trust is they didn't cross state lines and were regulated by a state. They would have to make the cars in that state and only sell them in that state. What if agriculture operated that way? They only grow the food in that state and only sell it in that state. What is banks operated that way? You have state banks that only operate in one state. What is clothing companies operated that way? You have to make it in one state and can only sell it one state. What is defense contractors operated that way? You can only make F-16's in Texas and only sell them in Texas. What is oil companies operated that way? If you drill it in one state you can only sell it in that state.

It would be like 50 countries completely isolated from each other. This exemption is totally wrong on all counts every way you look at it.

The value to consumers of repealing this exemption is that our insurance industry will now operate like every other industry in America, across state lines, as interstate rather than intrastate companies. They should have operated this way all along.

Actually, the way I learned it, the idea was that our republic would be a group of loosely knot states with their own laws and rights - under a very limited federal government.

Of course, that didn't last too long.

Once again, now insurance companies operating in Texas an charge Texans as much as they charge someone living in NY.
The cost of health insurance WAS (pre illegal) much less than that of a lot of states. For that reason, premiums in Texas were less.

Now we are all going to be paying the same premiums, regardless of the insurance companies liability in the situation

That doesn't seem like a good thing.

All those 'associations' had to do was get a charter in the other states they wanted to operate in. They would, of course, have to abide by their rules.

No, anytime the federal government takes over something - the people are going to loose.

So are you saying you want to repeal the Sherman Anti-Trust Act for all businesses? Because that would be the only equitable resolution to the present dilemma of lobbied favoritism being paid to the insurance industry. There is nothing about the insurance industry, any part of it, that makes it suitable for an exemption from the Sherman Anti-Trust Act that's been around in our country since 1890 for good reason. It was amended in 1914 to clarify in more detail what the Sherman Anti-Trust Act was originally passed to do.

Is there some reason why you should have a lower premium than someone else for the same insurance coverage?