Oh, so can I … but it involves a single-payer system.

It’s absurd that we are even making a vaccine for it.

Well, it is clear you aren’t an economist. Just as the mortgage interest tax credit has completely distorted the price of houses relative to rental property, this would have the perverse incentive of making already overpriced private medical insurance more expensive for employers. It’s a market distortion just as is any tax-based buying incentive, and it is one sure to add 50 pages to the already overwhelming tax code.

Jay, do me a favor, don’t try to make my job as an employer any more difficult by promoting anti-business legislation in support of health insurance lobbyists.

The articles I was reading over at the RWJ Foundation say there’s a federal law on the books now that gives states the exclusive right to regulate insurance sold within their borders. Before interstate purchasing could be implemented, Congress would have to deal with that. If they don’t, any law that takes away the authority of state insurance commissions would be ripe for challenge.

Invoking the Commerce Clause is one way they could get it done.

As for your concerns about the tax-credit model, I see what you’re up against. I can be convinced that divorcing health coverage from employment is doable. Actually, that might be the only long-term goal both sides agree on. The hitch is making sure folks (like you) can still find affordable insurance somewhere.

Remember when Sensenbrenner turned off the mics and the lights, took his gavel and left while a Democrat was making his opening remarks?

Good times.

Jay = the head of the ward, trying to clean the feces off the padded walls

My objection to the tax credit model is that it will more than likely drive employer-based insurance out of business. Once you get rid of the tax incentive for employers to provide insurance many will start dropping the benefit. Especially if younger, healthier workers opt out of the employer plan.

No tax break will be large enough to cover private insurance for my family if we can’t even get a quote on a policy due to my kids and my pre-existing conditions.

Also, I like invoking the Commerce Clause if we allow policies to cross state lines. But I have very little faith that such regulation will actually make it into law. So again, you will have insurers shopping around for the friendliest state in which to do business – gaining not just protection from lawsuits, but also avoiding mandatory coverage laws. Massachusetts, for example, has mandatory coverage of plastic surgery for children born with cleft palates. Kentucky does not.

IF insurance companies could be run SOLEY as non-profits (as BC/BS once were), and IF they could be sufficiently regulated at the federal level, we might be able to get away without single payer. But I think there are plenty of models of mixed single payer + private insurance out there that work a hell of a lot better than what we have now.

Suppose health insurance carried some sort of rating system. A cluster of ratings could indicate whether a given health insurance plan has high average out of pocket, whether it covers treatments likely to be needed by children or elderly, high or low co-pays, etc.

At least one of the papers on their website suggests that any legislation to allow Interstate Purchasing should invoke the commerce clause to allow the feds to regulate insurance products sold across state lines.

Once you do that, the whole arrangement becomes quite close to what the House bill calls an “exchange.”

You will get some state setup with lax insurance industry friendly regulation that will make it impossible to sue or appeal claims and they will dominate the market, while people have less coverage than they do now. Think of why credit cards are all based in Delaware or South Dakota and you’ll see why cross-border insurance is dangerous.

It’s also been said that the health insurance industry saw profits increase 400 percent between 2000 and 2007. And apparently medical malpractice insurance rates for American doctors are astronomical.

“They’re trying to develop an environment where they can take over” – Paul Broun

It sounds like the insurance industry trust already has. FUD works!

The response to his links has not risen to the level of actual discussion.

The House bill’s “Health Care Insurance Market” versus the Heritage Foundation’s “Interstate Purchasing”–compare and contrast. (If you need middle ground, refer to the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation website.)

Or holler about the teabaggers. Your choice.

Plus, it’s code word for the abortion debate. A large percentage of fear radio call ins end up talking about abortion. That’s the glue that keeps them all a unified and constipated family. Enter Trig.

Everyone: “Here’s a point by point refutation of every stupid think you just said.”

Jay: “Yeah, this is about what I expected. I knew I was wasting my time.”

Everyone: “Ditto.”

Just a little friendly political payback for getting shut out of the process for 6 years, remember? They shut out the Dems from hearings and meetings, they would hold the floor open extra long, they would insert provisions into bills at 3AM, etc etc.

When the GOP does it to Dems, it’s ok.

But when they get a little mud thrown back at them, they scream and cry like girls.