Georgia House Passes Selling Insurance Over State Lines

[Crabcake Johnny]

I guess I'll need Somarco's opinion on whether or not this has any chance in the Senate.

In a nutshell, this bill would allow a carrier that's licensed to sell in Georgia to sell plans that are not. This would avoid all GA mandates and unless I'm missing something, even filing the plan in GA?

As an example, let's say United Health One has products that are not currently sold in GA. If this passes it's open season. As as the carrier is simply licensed in GA they can offer their entire arsenal of products. Possibly a better example would be Aetna. If this passes, Georgians would be allowed to buy any Aetna plan, which would be interesting since Aena's plans vary greatly by state.

This would also mean that a GA licensed carrier would be able to sell some bottom of the barrel plan that never in a million years would the GA DOI allow.

Ga. House OK's selling insurance over state lines - BusinessWeek

 

[somarco]

Can't say. Both houses controlled by Republicans + (R) Gov.

As to the mandates, the article seems to imply the only requirement would be to be in compliance with federal mandates.

Don't know about filing requirements.

The DOI doesn't have the budget or manpower to police legal policies sold now. Of course we have plenty of junk policies of all flavors already bought and sold here so this will be a carnival.

Selling across state lines never made much sense to me.

If a state is going to allow carriers to sell policies from other states that don't meet our mandates, then why not just grant the same flexibility to carriers already selling here.

If this passes, expect some major push back from current carriers, especially those that dominate certain markets already.

This is not just for health, but any kind of insurance. BCBSGA already has problems with Humana, Coventry and others. Now if they have to compete with carriers from other states they won't be happy.

Seems even more wide open for auto insurance.

If this takes off, they have shot themselves in the foot since business sold by agents from other states could reduce income of resident agents. We have an income tax here but I don't think it would apply to non-resident agents.

Of course lost income for GA agents means less money to spend on things like gas and retail items that generate fuel and sales tax revenue.

I believe this is the law of unintended consequences at work.

If this passes, the policies would have to comply with mandates from another state but not GA. It does not mean a free ride, allowing carriers to sell plans completely lacking in mandates.

http://www.cahi.org/cahi_contents/resources/pdf/PolicyTrendsMandatedBenefitsOct2010.pdf

http://www.cahi.org/cahi_contents/resources/pdf/MandatesintheStates2010.pdf

 

[HealthGuy]

Broader question: Does this state law jive with Obamacrap mandates?

 

[STIBROKER]

we are living in wacky times for sure......

 

[Ann H]

In the race to the bottom of the barrel, I wonder if a state will lower mandates in order to attract more business, and therefore attract premium taxes. Take the state of Delaware for instance, as an example of a state where many businesses incorporate because of their attractive corporate laws. Other states have low taxes to attract businesses. Perhaps a state would degrade their standards on insurance mandates in order to attract many insurance companies to domicile there and sell policies across state lines, thereby receiving larger premium tax dollars. Just a thought.

 

[somarco]

Does this state law jive with Obamacrap mandates?

It's not law yet. Has to go through the Senate and signed by the guv.

If/when it does, policies will have to comply with federal guidelines.

 

[dgoldenz]

Yeah, there aren't enough plans to choose from as it is...would be interesting to run a Norvax quote and see "Showing plans 1-20 of 62,692. Choose your plan below:

 

[bill3173]

Selling across state lines never made much sense to me.

If a state is going to allow carriers to sell policies from other states that don't meet our mandates, then why not just grant the same flexibility to carriers already selling here.

If this passes, the policies would have to comply with mandates from another state but not GA. It does not mean a free ride, allowing carriers to sell plans completely lacking in mandates.

This is at the heart of what makes this request so peculiar.

What would you as an agent tell them? "well, if you want a policy that will cover a free ear wax removal once per year, I have a Florida plan over here in the corner, but it doesn't cover the the XY State mandated hair loss treatment, so you need to be aware of that?

As odd as this bit of possible legislation seems, it appears that it would also increase the utility of licensed agents.

 

[Norwayguy]

I believe Somarco hit it on the head....If plans from another state with less mandates are fine for GA residents why not just lower the mandates...Its like a post of CA auto insurance...CA has certain minimum coverages by law....but they also have a program fro low income people that provides coverage under the minimums...If its good enough for a subset of the population then it should be good enough for the entire state....Why have a certain minimum for on set of people and a different lower set for others...The big thing with car insurance is to protect the people you hurt...

 

[somarco]

"well, if you want a policy that will cover a free ear wax removal once per year, I have a Florida plan over here in the corner, but it doesn't cover the the XY State mandated hair loss treatment, so you need to be aware of that?

As odd as this bit of possible legislation seems, it appears that it would also increase the utility of licensed agents.

Agents and quote engines aren't that smart. I doubt you can find a dozen agents in any state that know the all mandated benefits. Even with a cheat sheet (like the one above from CAHI) you are not going to find agents willing to offer that kind of advice while working on half commission, dealing with people who came off group and are taking 9 different meds and can't understand why a carrier doesn't want them, and have been paying $350/mo for family coverage (including dental) and you are showing them a similar plan for $1400/mo before medication and tobacco loads.

This approach is pure idiocy.

Just when you thought the legislators couldn't get any dumber they come along and prove you wrong.