(cont'd) If we suddenly gained the ability to purchase coverage from out-of-state, we'd choose cheaper policies with less coverage for improbable maladies, and these people would lose their cash cow and be stuck with their own medical bills. Guess what happened to this proposed law? "Over the years, the Legislature has carefully weighed the priorities of Arizonans when determining what should be included in a standard health-benefit package," [Governor] Brewer said [when vetoing the bill]. "The same level of public scrutiny should be applied whenever the Legislature attempts to remove a mandate." Translation: Health insurance is "too important" to be entrusted to the free market. Yeah, Obamacare certainly proved the wisdom of that.

"Have you noticed that insurance isn't sold nationwide? They can sell only in certain areas. And why? Because the insurance companies (who fund the law-makers) don't like competition; they get rid of as much of it as they can." That's one point of view. Here's an opposite one. Several years ago, we actually had a state bill pending to allow residents to buy out of state health insurance. Guess who jumped up to oppose it? Not the insurance companies. It was rent-seeking pressure groups of patients with rare/orphan maladies, who had succeeded in lobbying past legislatures to make coverage for their conditions mandatory in any policy sold by an in-state insurer. Since they could not afford treatment for their diseases, they lobbied the politicians to pass their bills off on the rest of us. (cont'd)