The Denver Post reports that Colorado “House Bill 1008 would bar health insurance companies from using gender as a basis for setting different premium rates for men and women.” Basically, insurers generally charge women higher premiums than men. Supporters of the bill want to make this illegal, and hence require men to pay more.
The Colorado Independent reports that “insurance companies agreed not to oppose the bill.” Interesting. One cynical reason I can imagine is that insurers are forced to charge men more, and hence make more money. Their competitors must do the same, so it’s not as if the male customers are free to buy a competitor’s cheaper product.
This bill would then make insurance a vehicle for forced charity. This is wrong.
Or maybe insurers will charge women less, not be able to profit from it, and hence design their plans such that women do not want them.
This is about free trade, to the extent the politicians have
allowed it in insurance markets. This bill would force men to pay more for their insurance, even though male customers and insurers would otherwise agree to a lower price. Politicians have no right to interfere with such a voluntary transaction.
If insurance companies are over-charging women, it sounds like a great opportunity for a competitor to swoop in and offer better prices. Too bad politicians forbid individuals from buying more affordable policies available in other states. Or if competitors are not offering better prices, maybe there’s a reason.
Some might point to sexism. I cannot imagine a greedy insurance executive being so misogynist that he would not want women as customers. After all, wouldn’t such a disturbing individual want women to be dependent on his product for something as important as medical care?
Similar Posts:
