Thursday, June 4, 2009

Free Markets and Nick's Law

The free markets exist and prosper when there is accountability and transparency. There is none in the private insurance market in OK. There has been no insurance mandates passed in OK since 2001, yet our insurance has been increasing each year on an avgerage of 10% or more and not because of insurance mandates.

The insurance industry in OK has one of the lowest medical loss ratios in the nation. That means that they pay out the lowest percentage of premium dollars as claims. Is that free market principals?

The cost of Nick's Law (autism insurance legislation) has been shown to have a potential increase by two different studies of 0.3% to 1.0%. And there are 23 other independent studies that show similar mandates to be less than 1% in other states. Yet our House leadership hides behind a factually inaccurate report that concludes the cost to be as high as 19.8%. There is no supporting documentation or other studies anywhere to support this figure.

Other states are passing autism insurance mandates because of the tremendous cost savings to the taxpayers. Texas this past week expanded their autism insurance mandate. A very red state and very conservative. Their message. "This is a fiscally conservative approach to the taxpayers because it will save the state $4.06 billion over the next few decades".

By denying people who pay for health insurance, the coverage for a medical condition with medically necessary and clinically proven treatments, you are endorsing a movement for a gov't health care system.

The insurance industry made their bed, now it is time to sleep in it.

Parents and supporters of Nick's Law encourage private insurance coverage and want as many people as possible to enroll. Insure Oklahoma offers great subsidized programs for people to purchase health insurance.

I for one, do not want a single payer system from the gov't regarding autism. It has failed in England. We need specialized care, not a template care system. A single payer system might work for the general health, however, I have my doubts, but by continuing to allow an insurance industry to continue their discriminatory practices, we will get to that type of system courtesy of their actions.

There are only two industries in the US that enjoy anti-trust protections from our federal gov't. One is baseball and the other is the insurance industry. Do we really need another AIG?

1 comment:

Yogi♪♪♪ said...

Under the present system there really is no reason for insurance companies to cover much of anything. If one of them covered autism then they would be at competitive disadvantate to the others. The solution is mandated coverage.
It is like pollution laws. Prior to laws why would a company install extra equipment to control pollution. They would suffer a cost disadvantage. You mandate pollution controls then it makes it more fair for everybody.