Quantcast
National Underwriter Property And Casualty Insurance News.

Breaking News
NU Exclusives

Insurance Lobbyists Fear A Senate Move To Kill Antitrust Exemption 

 
Published 11/20/2009 

Print This Article
Return To Article
Normal Text
Large Text

NU Online News Service, Nov. 20, 11:15 a.m. EST

Health insurance representatives said they are concerned lawmakers may still move to amend health care legislation on the Senate floor to include a repeal of their industry’s antitrust exemption.

Officials of the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors/AHIA also noted that the only reference to antitrust laws found in the initial review of the Senate bill deal with respect to co-ops and nonprofit insurance provided through co-ops.

That section specifies that application of antitrust laws will not be limited with respect to co-op insurance, a NAIFA official said.

Tom Currey, NAIFA president, said the bill does not appear to contain the House-passed bill’s authority for Federal Trade Commission study of all lines of insurance, or its imposition of antitrust rules relative to health and medical malpractice rate-making and market share planning.

Industry officials, he said, are also concerned that no provision tightening medical malpractice laws is included in the Senate bill, despite the fact that the public appears to be supporting such controls.

Larry Smarr, president/CEO of the Physician Insurers Association of America, Rockville, Md. said his members areheartened”                                      the
Senate bill does not include provisions to set aside McCarran-Ferguson Act anti-trust exemptions for medical liability insurers.”

But, other industry lobbyists noted that S. 1681, which does repeal exemptions for health and malpractice insurers, was reported out last month by the Senate Judiciary Committee and has 16 cosponsors and its language will likely be offered on the Senate floor in the form of an amendment.

That is preferable to having the exemption repeal language in the actual text, Mr. Smarr said, because it will then be subject to individual scrutiny, rather than being buried in the context of the larger health care bill.

“Our goal now is to continue to educate senators about how repealing McCarran [Ferguson Act] will be anti-competitive and could actually harm consumers rather than help them,” he said.

“The attempt to set aside McCarran-Ferguson protections continues to be a ruse for distracting attention from much needed tort reform, which is not addressed in a meaningful way by the Senate bill,” he said.

He added it’s ironic “in the face of a new AP poll which shows that 54 percent of Americans want Congress to deal with medical liability lawsuits driving up the cost of medical care, while only 32 percent are opposed.”

The U.S. Senate, he said, is voting for the trial lawyers’ group American Association for Justice, “not the American people.”

 


Comment on This Article

Name:
Email (will not be published):
Subject:
Comment:

    • 11/23/2009 10:15:17 AM
    • journeyhome
    • health care
    • The fact remains that big insurance by refusing care to patients and reimbursement to doctors over typos has ticked everyone off. They have a monopoly over the whole process and a well financed lobby team (including Lieberman's wife) and representatives on both sides of the isle. A friend of mine recently laid off just he and his spouse is paying $2,500.00 dollars a month for his COBRA. Health insurance costs more than his mortgage. Anyone taking up the insurance industry's cause doesn't know what they are talking about. If you think the insurance companies are going to voluntarily lower their cost while having a monopoly over the process – you are being disingenuous …Over 60% of all US bankruptcies are attributable to medical problems. Most victims are middle class, well educated and have health insurance - (The American Journal of Medicine) The insurance companies and their representatives in Congress would love to perpetuate a business model that is crippling our overall economy – a bunch of great Americans aren’t they? 90% of the wealth concentrated in 1% of the population is no way to run a country but a heck of a way to establish a royalty ruling class. Yacht sales can not sustain 350 million people. I'm for the public option, competition and a level playing field or break up the big insurers like we did AT&T. A slavish focus on profit margin might be good for the individual or a business, but it is one helluva lousy way to "govern" a Country. The GOP being a wholly owned subsidiary of Corporate America has a hard time with that concept. Paul Burke Author-Journey Home
    • 11/23/2009 11:34:10 AM
    • Jim O'Hare AIC AIS VP med mal claims
    • Healthcare anti trust
    • Who would't be unhappy if there license to control every aspect of a market is ended. In what area of business, in a capitalist society, does competition not benefit the populus? I'll wait..... none. let us agree that BC/BS and Aetna and Humana do not deliver healthcare, they are just a brokerage in a stress free enviorment. Why do they need this protection- The only answer is to prevent competition and preserve the license to pick pockets. Arent we tired yet of electing politicians to represent us only to see them represent business? regards jim

Recent Issues


Archived Issues

Most Read Articles


Related Articles



www.summitbusinessmedia.com © Copyright National Underwriter Property & Casualty. A Summit Business Media publication. All Rights Reserved.