The Senate bill has some good regulations, but it lacks teeth for real enforcement. Passing a law against something does not magically make it go away; we need look no farther than the amount of illegal drugs used in this country for proof.
The Senate bill does not create a national exchange, a national insurance commissioner; nor does it even repeal health insurance companies’ exemption from anti-trust laws, which would give the Federal Trade Commission some more oversight over health insurers. In effect it hands the states a piece of paper with a bunch of new regulations written on it and says, “Hey you, make sure these get enforced.” Given the very poor track record of state enforcement of insurance regulations this is a regulatory structure which is very bad for middle class American families but great for insurance companies.
State insurance commissioners are often political appointees who tend to have very close relationships with the insurance companies. Many after a relatively short time in the position go on to find very lucrative jobs in the industry they were supposed to police. Whether it is regulation of insurance companies or banks, we have seen firsthand the awful results of having a revolving door between regulator and industry. (There is also the related issue: can our country after years of Republican attacks on the idea of regulation and civil service even properly regulated extremely powerful corporations anymore? I strongly have my doubts and that is why I think a public insurance option is the only check against the private insurance industry that I think can work in this country.)
In many states like Texas, the governor has the power to appoint the state insurance commissioner. So Gov. Rick Perry, who strongly opposes the bill, has the power to appoint the guy whose job it will be to implement health care reform in Texas. This is not the implementation and regulatory structure you want if your goal is to make health care reform a national success. This is a recipe for a disaster. The patchwork quality of enforcement differing from state to state will ruin the entire insurance reform effort.
It is critical to focus on the long term implications of any reform effort. After a new reform structure is created it is almost impossible to scrap it and start over. Building reform on a foundation of failed state-based insurance regulators and wasteful private insurance companies is a terrible idea. Giving the broken private health insurance industry hundreds of billions in government money and millions of mandatory customers without serious checks on their behavior (public competition and a tough national regulation) will only make future efforts to get an actually functioning health care system even harder.
It doesn’t take a magician’s trick to figure out that the Senate bill fails to lay the ground work for future progressive change. It dooms health care activists to 40 years of fighting to undo the bad structure this Senate bill would put in place.



40 Comments








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Jane, your title and the essay here bring into sharp focus exactly what is wrong with a state-based approach. But as has been noted (concerning the bad structure of the bill and the forty years it could take to fix it), that’s just the half of it.
Once again, you nailed the issue and the frame. I hope enough people are listening.
I also want to say how much I appreciate how hard you are fighting to get the reform bills improved. I know of no one who has been braver or done more.
Words fail… You are the best.
Thanks but it is me Jon not Jane that wrote the piece.
Jon, Sorry I forgot it was a retweet. Your work on health care reform also has been fantastic. You’ve sunk your teeth into the details like virtually no one else. Saw you on Democracy now the other night. Great work! Whether it’s your writing, appearances in the so-called MSM or your work to inform other bloggers (via conference call, one of which I was on) your work has been awesome. Thank you!
Great to have you on twitter, Jon. (Maybe you should have tweaked David Shuster’s tweet!)
This is a great post. I am pretty good friends with our state insurance commissioner. She knows what she’s doing but I can see the reluctance to move and take a public position on issues she just ran on like single payer (as expanded Medicare) or a strong public option for health insurance. The activists long since gave up trying to get her to ‘side’ with us.
Not in the least. What a scary concept. I’m a Texan. We have the highest percentage of insured here. I’m one of them. That’s why I’ve supported this bill. There are some okay regulations in it, but it’s gonna require some okay regulators. I may have to move to another state.
Jon,
I benefitted greatly from three of your posts while writing “They’re Not Done Screwing Us Yet” last night.
Thank you for all your great work!
Short answer – NO.
Of course not.
Thank you for all the effort and time of your life in addressing this -HCR- issue.
Please keep up the excellent work.
In a way, the lack of success at enforcing drug laws is an argument that there may be no hope of the HCR bills’ regulations working at all. We have a federal agency that enforces those laws, along with narcotics units in nearly any police force of any size. Nevertheless, drugs use is about as prevalent as it ever was.
To my mind, leaving the enforcement of these new regulations to the states is tantamount to having no regulations. California can’t even enforce them. How will Alaska or Rhode Island?
Here’s where it seems to me the GOP AGs who are threatening a lawsuit against the “Cornhusker” provision have a point. Seems to me they’re saying clearly that states can’t be singled out like Ben Nelson wants.
Only one solution: nationalize it. Single-payer it.
Preview, Sandy, Preview….
We are looking at the economy continuing to crash, and president Obama applying Republican deficit cutting ‘remedies’ of transferring wealth from the public coffers to the Wall Street financiers, in a mad rush to get out of Dodge with as much loot as possible before the whole kaboodle devolves into a out of control, popular backlash.
HCR might as well be written on watter! It will never happen, no matter what legislation is finally agreed to.
We need to really, promptly get off this HCR horse, for either way it’s dead I tell ya, – dead!
Interesting post Jon.
Do both the Senate and House versions of this bill include the “state oversight” provision? If not, there may be a possiblity of having a federal commissioner established in conference before the final bill is signed.
Your thoughts?
Excellent essay Jon. The states may indeed be the “laboratories of democracy” and its true that in the past a lot of innovative progressive legislation was passed at the state level that foreshadowed or surpassed eventual federal legislation. But when it comes to state regulatory agencies and state judiciaries, the opposite is true. The states are often and increasingly bastions of industry-friendly regulation and government. In fact, increasingly the states are beginning to resemble nothing so much as a gaggle of third-world countries, competing and pleading for corporate colonization. The constant club the corporations have over the states is the threat to move their operations elsewhere or cut workforce. This dynamic has been going on for a long long time. We can go all the way back the Governor Woodrow Wilson’s fight to get his “seven sisters” anti-trust legislation through the 1912 New Jersey legislature: the same arguments we see now were deployed then and the reform legislation was all defeated repealed in the outcome. Sic semper corrigo!
No one wants to admit that most State Governments are as, or more crooked than the Federal Government.
Most Governors are just as rediculous, and a lot more political if that is possible.
Passing things to the States has created many of this Countries problems, because the States are forced to spend our money on what the Government tells them they must.
Healthcare may seem good, but many things like rules, codes, and laws are against everything this Country used to stand for.
I wouldn’t trust Rick Perry to mow my lawn. He ranks just below Pete King on my list of most horrible politicians. Oops did I just make an ad hominem attack? Shame on me.
Contrast this with the note the insurance industry sent to Congress last year that read, “Hey you, make sure this health care legislation gets passed.
PS
You’ll be getting significantly plumped up campaign contributions shortly. God bless America.”
Gov. Richards was the last sane, least corrupt one at the Governor’s Mansion and she couldn’t make it beyond one term given the trends. I can’t leave out the Legislature, the redistricting opposed by the Killer D’s that got shoved through … I can go on and on. The extremely short-sighted, blind profit taking at any cost perfected by the extensive corporate machine that swept Texas then really got perfected in Washington is now a piece of history for you so eloquently documented by Bill Moyers. The short answer: NO!
This is the best indicator yet that Obama and the Senate do not want effective reform, no matter how much physical and financial harm that allows insuresters to continue to inflict on the customers dependent on their services.
States from Ohio to Hawaii are cutting back budgets with a meat cleaver. State regulators are overstretched. With the best will in the world, it will be a mammoth job to implement a new regulatory scheme. The most likely response will be to take the easiest route. That is, to allow insurers – who have access to the same dining, country and athletic clubs as their governors – to write the road map for how to do it.
Combine this with Congress and Mr. Obama’s Private Insurers Only water fountain approach to providing health coverage, and they will succeed in institutionalizing insurance discrimination for some time to come.
Off topic, I apologize: anyone know where PA’s and CA’s single payer legislation stand?
I don’t trust Rick Perry to put his pants on in the morning, why would I ever trust him with this?
I mean, seriously. That man is a mouth-breather.
Medical insurance companies make money by paying out as little as possible for medical care.
Medical care providers, drug companies, device makers and hospital corporations make money getting paid for medical care.
No amount of regulation, regardless of how well-written or properly enforced, can resolve these differences between the two forces on which American patients are forced to rely for medical treatment.
The system is simply not designed to work.
No kidding. The headline in today’s paper here in Madison is how the state is defaulting on 10 million dollars it’s supposed to pay to make up for lost property tax on government buildings. They just blew a 10 million dollar hole in our city budget.
And our state government is a lot better off than many. Last year, they actually RAISED TAXES ON THE RICH to close most of the budget gap.
Shocking, I know. I almost needed a fainting couch myself.
Well, drug companies also make lots of money selling us drugs that don’t work, or whose research we already paid for, or at prices several times higher than the rest of the world.
Ah, correction. It’s a 4.4 million dollar hole in our budget, the rest is from other cities with government offices. Still stings.
I can’t see states ponying up the dough or the manpower to regulate much of anything at this point. They’re all broke. Some of them, like California, go beyond broke into Failed State territory.
Thanks for your great work and determination on health care reform. It’s been a much needed beacon of truth.
If the members of the CONgress of the United States were interested in actually providing the BEST healthcare system on the planet for their constituents (universal access to quality, affordable healthcare,) they would all be on the next flight to France to see how it is done.
Modelling I believe it is called.
I repeat, the system is simply not designed (or intended) to work.
Let’s put it this way:
Ben Nelson was an insurance commissioner, after being a lawyer for insurance companies, and before he ran for office.
Is that the kind of guy you want enforcing regulations on insurance companies? Ben Nelson?
Had to delurk on this one. I had the great misfortune to learn how
least corrupt
Ann Richards was while serving as a labor adminstrator for a national labor union based in Texas from 1990 to ’92. Her attorney general just finished his halfway house time on state corruption charges in 2007 and Ann went to work as a lobbyist for the friggin’ tobacco companies after she lost to Shrub in 1994. She and ex-con Dan Morales GUTTED the decent Texas Workers’ Compensation law impacting ALL of my international members.
Nope, Jon is bull’s-damn-eye on target. Chomsky has noted this effect along with many great labor writers: if you are a very wealthy corporation do you want to battle some piddly ass state government for dollars stolen from working people or do you want to face the much more imposing might of a well focused and financed federal agency. It is easy to discern. You want to be able to have the states kill each other driving down dollars and benefits to working people.
Great job, Jon, both here and on Democracy Now! You acquit yourself well in all venues.
This comment is priceless. Priceless!
Ben Nelson was an insurance commissioner, after being a lawyer for insurance companies, and before he ran for office. Is that the kind of guy you want enforcing regulations on insurance companies? Ben Nelson?
That’s who Ezra, Kevin, and MY are counting on.
Gov. Sonny Perdue, Georgia? rotflol.
I do not know the gov. personally, after obesrving the documentary : Fighting Goliath the Texas Coal Wars : i would have to say HELL NO.
I live in Texas with Pope Perry, and I wouldn’t trust him to open a door for me, let alone do anything with health insurance except screw people over to enrich himself and his friends. Hopefully Perry will finally get ousted, but I definitely worry about what theocratic creatard will replace him.
Ditto on the thanks for trying to help people out.
Here’s some irony for you. Texas is not broke (they haven’t even had to take out a “bridge loan”), and Rick Perry is governor. At this point it looks like next November we’ll have either another term of Perry as governor or the equally conservative and corrupt Kay Bailey Hutchison.
Doesn’t Texas provide almost nothing in the way of government services though? In effect, what other states have been forced to do, kicking and screaming, in the way of cuts, is the status quo for Texas.
You are quite correct, it is a matter of pride down here in Texas that we set the standard for non-provision of services. Be it a lousy education, electing idiots to the State Board of Education (“I disagree with these experts! Somebody’ gotta stand up to experts…” Don McLeroy, DDS, former Chairman of the Texas SBOE), several members of the SBOE actually promote the abolition of Public Education! We have Regent’s School of Law “Constitutional Lawyers”, Raging Lunatics (the two are by no means mutually exclusive), Mouth frothing Republicans of that special Texan variety, their platform is unchanged form 1920-see for yourself! (PDF)
Texas has the lowest Tax Burden of any State in the Union, but to hear these cretins complain, you would think they were in Sweden. We constantly find new and inovative methods of taking services from the most needy and rewarding those who have done nothing to merit financial aid. Only in Texas can you buy a Court that is willing to rule that “it’s not money-laundering if it’s a check”, much to the Americans for a Republican Majority and Tom Delay’s delight.
Texans are proud of being the 50th of the 50 States, not even Mississippi can deny us our rightful place as the best/worst in the Nation. This is no mean feat, considering Haley Barbour has the helm in Mississippi. Texas Troglodytes are of superior(?) quality and Damn, do we have a lot of them! How in the world do you think a dipshit (Is dipshit hyphenated?) like Perry and his immediate predecessor were both reelected? I actually believe that all of the field research for the “Peter Principle” was performed here in Austin, for this city has seen far more than its share of incompetence being rewarded betyond all expectations.
Someone please tell me why any governor should enforce such an unpopular bill. It doesn’t make sense to me that the populus doesn’t want this bill and then we should want our politicans to enforce it?
No, let every governor refuse to abide by it. I’m shocked it took them (CA & NY) so long to realize the cost. Ms. LA senator sure made a sweet deal didn’t she. One time payoff of $300 million to her state in return for the $425 million per year contribution LA has to make. Don’t LA schools teach math?
and then we have the very poor track record of national enforcement of fire industry regulation.
i do NOT trust larry summers and crew to regulate insurance. and how would a bush administration be expected to do any better than rick perry? at least at the state level there is more opportunity to influence the political process than at the national level (and to use other states as examples).
worse i think is this — from the letter to pelosi and reid: