Insurance Pricing: Currently, States license in-state insurance companies and establish pricing rules. The Baucus Plan provides similar National rules which would supersede conflicting State rules. It makes a messy situation messier. Better and much simpler would be to require each state to recognize the licenses issued by the other states (suggested by Cato Institute). This would allow interstate competition and would result in overall lower prices.

Then what? More than 2 subsidiaries of 1 or 2 companies collude to fix prices? Sounds like Cato took one too many whacks over the head from Insp. Cleuseau.

Also, could you expand on how replacing 50 sets of rules with 1 set of rules would make things messier? Doesn't seem likely to change things a lot but messier? Don't see that.

Insurance premiums are more expensive in Massachusetts than any other state. Of course the general cost of living is more expensive than in most other states, so there is no reason health care and by extension insurance should be exceptions. Of course, health care and outcomes are significantly better than in Mississippi and the states insurance regulations are likely a contributing factor.

The problem with forcing states to recognize licenses granted by the governments of other states is that some states have significantly weaker, and less effective licensing protocols. By mandating recognition, the federal government essentially makes the poorest licensing protocol the national one.

I'm also surprised that the CATO Institute would support such a violation of states rights. Afterall, they certainly wouldn't advocate that the federal government force states to recognize all marriages granted in other states.