Oct 23, 2009

Eliminate Anti-Trust Exemption for Health Insurers? Good Luck, Congressman!

In his recent article on The Hill's Congress Blog, Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) suggested something I've advocated for years: Eliminate the anti-trust exemption that health insurance companies have used for years to build their near monopolies across the U.S. Their cartel-like control over the access to and financing of health care in this country would never have occurred if these profit-bloated managed care companies had been subject to the same anti-trust rules that apply to other industries.

So now, while the healthcare reform debate continues to be orchestrated according to the whims of the mighty insurance lobby in Washington, it's almost inconceivable to think that Big Insurance will sit still amidst any rumblings of anti-trust proponents. The insurance lobby has already demonstrated it can get exactly what it wants (or prevent what it doesn't want) from Congress, without having to pull out any of the stops. They've done it almost casually. Imagine the fight they could mount (over anti-trust) if they really put their minds and resources to it.

While I support Rep. Grijalva's sentiment with regard to removing the anti-trust exemption, and I wish him luck with his efforts, the odds of it succeeding fall somewhere between slim and none.

Oct 20, 2009

Right Steps? Wrong Directions? Congress Needs to Look at Itself First

A recent article in the Huffington Post by U.S. Representative Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania labeled the Baucus bill that emerged from Senate committee as the "right step in the wrong direction." Like other representatives, Sestak, a Democrat who is also running for Senate, decried the elimination of the public option in the Senate bill. In Sestak's own words: The "public option is crucial if we want to introduce competition and bring down costs. The current health insurance industry is highly monopolized, with a small group of insurers exercising an almost "cartel" like power to dictate prices and continually raise premiums and fees on American families.... A public option will guarantee competition and, as it will not be subsidized by the government and will operate on a fair playing field, it will use market forces to bring down prices and raise the quality of care."

It's great that Sestak and other members of Congress (albeit, only Democrats) understand that a public option is crucial and will guarantee competition. Unfortunately, what Sestak and everyone else forgets, or conveniently overlooks, is the nature of that competition. Big insurance companies comprising the "cartel" have effectively quashed competition in their own industry to create near-monopolies in most healthcare markets. They’ve expertly beaten competitors who've been much fiercer than any pubic option could ever be. They've defeated competitors with impunity and ruthless efficiency.

To date, Big Insurance has flexed a relatively small degree of its massive lobbying muscle. Yet look at how Congress has all but rolled over. Committees have dismantled or eliminated critical components of healthcare reform. The insurance cartel's complete dominance over the legislative process is further proof of their unmitigated power. Compared to that power, the public option as competition will be brushed aside by the insurance companies like a gnat off an elephant's butt.

How can things change when Congress is so overwhelmingly influenced by the insurance lobby? The money, staff, and resources that Congress people so gladly accept from the industry is the real problem. Until Representatives and Senators escape the cartel's clutches, nothing like real progress toward healthcare reform can be made.