Republicans control the presidency as well as both houses of Congress. They were elected on a tsunami of public frustration with Democrats and their heavy-handed regulatory fatwas – especially with regard to healthcare.
So how come some Republicans are still carrying water for former Speaker Nancy Pelosi?
When the ultra-liberal California Democrat was speaker, she pushed legislation that would have made it not just more difficult for health insurance companies to do business across state lines – it would have potentially made it criminal for them to do so.
Very much like the proposal made by another liberal Democrat – Hillary Clinton – that would have made it a criminal offense to obtain medical care outside the government-controls-everything system she proposed back in the ’90s.
Here’s the deal:
Under current law – the McCarran-Ferguson Act – health insurance companies have been exempted from certain provisions of the Sherman Anti-Trust act. For example, they may legally share data about their customers among themselves and across state lines.
For the Pelosians, this is nefarious.
The former speaker conjures the usual demagoguery about “obscene” profits in order to demonize the industry. (This is almost too-ironic given the ex-speaker’s estimated net worth – in excess of $100 million – much of it based on questionably cozy deals her husband made that a not-politically-connected person probably couldn’t have made.) For an underwriter – whether health or car or life – access to information about a prospective policyholder – including out-of-state records of claims filed – is necessary in order to equitably base premiums.Insurance, after all, is about risk management. For example, a person who has a string of at-fault accidents on his DMV driver’s record is a higher risk than a person who has never filed a claim. The fender-bending driver’s premiums will naturally be higher, taking account of the statistically greater likelihood that he will be involved in fender benders in the future.This isn’t unreasonable – much less unfair. Without such data, insurers are flying blind – and vulnerable to being blindsided by unanticipated claims costs.And policyholders in general end up paying more, as a hedge against unanticipated costs.It is these costs – imposed by the Pelosians – that the Pelosians characterize as “obscene.” That takes chutzpah. It’s not unlike the guy who just beat up his wife exclaiming: See what you made me do!Now, it’s not surprising to discover that Pelosi and other far-left Democrats favor legislation that blames the victim – and which is guaranteed to make the cost of health insurance go up.But it’s startling to find House Republicans – led by the usually sensible Paul Gosar of Arizona – pushing the Pelosian Agenda, the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act (H.R. 327).Like most of the laws coming out of the congressional confetti machine, H.R. 327’s title is hugely misleading. It is an almost Orwellian maxim that whatever the name given to a piece of legislation, the purpose of that legislation is exactly opposite. The Affordable Care Act as a for-instance.
H.R. 327 would not make the health insurance business more “competitive.” It would make it more insular, more stultified by red tape. The federal government would acquire more power than it already has to micromanage our healthcare.
This legislation would criminalize business practices that have been legal for more than 70 years (the McCarran-Ferguson Act was passed shortly after the end of WWII) and which – in the case of insurance underwriting – are essential to keeping costs within reason. The threat of criminal anti-trust prosecution would have a chilling effect on insurers, who would be inclined to play it safe – by raising prices across the board to cover their costs – rather than risk being frog-marched out of their offices by Feds.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) stated that “… to the extent that insurers would become subject to additional litigation, their costs and thus their premiums might” become more expensive.
And the sun might rise in the east tomorrow, too.
The Pelosians believe that risk management is “unfair” – though they have yet to apply this principle to car insurance and make the argument that drivers who constantly crash cars or get convicted for DWI shouldn’t have to pay more for their car insurance than safe drivers who’ve never had a claim filed against them.
Or that anti-trust procedures be initiate against Geico, Progressive and other car insurers for accessing and sharing state DMV drivers’ records across state lines.
After almost eight years of not-so-affordable-care, it’s up to Speaker Paul Ryan – and President Trump – to remind the Pelosians that elections have consequences and put the kibosh on this Democrat-in-drag bill.
Eric Peters is an automotive journalist and author.
If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions.
