re: #44 researchok

For one thing, while consumer protections do vary from state to state, they aren’t all that different

On what grounds do you say that? It’s totally untrue. Some states have enormous differences in consumer protection. If there was no big difference, the credit card companies wouldn’t have all moved.

Insurance companies will thrive if they offer a better and more reliable product, readily available to all.

What does this have to do with allowing them to compete across state lines?

Insurance companies will definitely thrive if the few legal recourses against them are further weakened by allowing them to move to whatever state (Deleware again, probably) have the weakest consumer protection laws. Right now, for example, you cannot sue an insurance company in civil suit for damages caused by refused payment for care; you can’t sue them for death, either. You can sue them to provide coverage, but if you die during that lawsuit, there is no suit against them your heirs can bring.

In a few states, creative attorney’s have begun to find loopholes in this protection, but it’s taken a long time, and they only work in some states.

I think that being able to or not being able to sue for death due to refused coverage is a rather significant difference in consumer protection, don’t you?