I have never questioned whether insurance companies fixed prices or indeed, determined which medical therapies would or would not be available to which patients. This is obviously true and obviously wrong. It should be illegal. My only point is whether the Robinson Patman act was the act which would govern the health insurance industry.
Terri Hyle
From: "Paul Double" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Online Democracy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: FW: [Winona] It's the Insurance Companies Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 17:39:05 -0600
Terry,
Robinson Patman Act is much broader than retail stores and goods.
In 1938 some Non Profit Hospitals and others were exempted in the "Non Profit Institutions Act" see this link.
http://www.lawmall.com/rpa/rpadrugs.html
A later ruling in the courts conclude however that government purchases were
"not" exempt since they were not specifically mentioned in the exemption as
a non profit. This could mean that VA prices, as an example, could be used
to enforce anticompetitive wholesale prices to drugstores.
The FTC Antitrust Actions in Health Care Services and Products October, 2003
is now released. I just downloaded a copy 105 pages and invite others to do
the same. I think Terri will find a great deal of FTC information that
supports RP for services as well. If RP has any gaps the Sherman or Clayton
Acts appear to able to fill them and drive the message home to the source.
It will in fact extend the rules to protect not only businesses engaged in
competition but discriminatory consumer prices and practices as well.
This is the address for the report.
http://www.ftc.gov/bc/hcupdate031024.pdf
If, anyone after reading these published government reports, viewing several
court cases which apply to healthcare "services" and still doesn't see price
manipulation and restraint of trade by insurance companies and their
intimidation of providers by their contracts with them then maybe a visit
from the healthcare division of the FTC to Minnesota is due.
Paul Double
From: terri hyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 11:03 PM
My understanding of the Robinson Patman act is that it specifically was
designed to exclude such things as medical and legal services. The Robinson
Patman act was passed by the U.S. Congress in 1936 to supplement the
Clayton Antitrust Act . The act forbade any person or firm engaged in
interstate commerce to discriminate in price to different purchasers of the
same commodity when the effect would be to lessen competition or to create a
monopoly. The purpose of the act was to protect independent retailers from chain-store competition, but it was also strongly supported by wholesalers eager to prevent large chain stores from buying directly from the manufacturers for lower prices.
There are lots of citations on the web, but a law library or attorney well versed in anti trust law would be a better source.
Terri Hyle << winmail.dat >>
_________________________________________________________________
Enjoy MSN 8 patented spam control and more with MSN 8 Dial-up Internet Service. Try it FREE for one month! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
