Politico reports that some policymakers are beginning to understand some of the unintended consequences that repealing McCarran-Ferguson will have. A few excerpts are below:
· “But Democrats look like they’ll scale back the legislation to protect insurance companies that offer malpractice coverage to doctors and other health care providers.”
· “‘Certainly, [the bill’s provision] should be narrowed,’ said Ben McKay, a senior vice president of federal government relations for the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. ‘It’s overly broad. There are consequences that reach far beyond just the health care industry into the property-casualty industry. This will have an impact on auto and home insurance.’”
· “‘Health insurance is one of the most regulated industries in America at both the federal and the state level,’ said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans. ‘The McCarran-Ferguson Act is extremely limited in scope and has nothing to do with competition within the health insurance industry. The focus should be on addressing the underlying cost of medical care, which is the key driver of rising health care costs.’”
· “Last October, the Congressional Budget Office said, ‘State laws already prohibit issuers of health insurance and medical malpractice insurance from engaging in practices such as price fixing, bid rigging and market allocations.’”
· “And earlier this year, the Congressional Research Service predicted that a repeal of McCarran-Ferguson would result in more lawsuits and might force smaller companies that rely on pooled data ‘to leave the market.’”
“In the CRS report, researchers noted that ‘further consolidation in the insurance industry as small insurers merge in order to gain the competitive advantage of additional information is a likely, albeit an ironic, possibility.’”
For the full story, click here.
