| Opinion/The Review

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Inviting collusion

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or

Daily Photo Galleries

'American Coyotes' Series

Traveling by Jeep, boat and foot, Tribune-Review investigative reporter Carl Prine and photojournalist Justin Merriman covered nearly 2,000 miles over two months along the border with Mexico to report on coyotes — the human traffickers who bring illegal immigrants into the United States. Most are Americans working for money and/or drugs. This series reports how their operations have a major impact on life for residents and the environment along the border — and beyond.

Letter to the Editor
Sunday, Oct. 20, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

The news story “Pa. House bills aimed at protecting consumer health care access, lawmakers say” (Oct. 3 and reported on state lawmakers proposing a law that would bind UPMC and Highmark if they do not end their dispute.

House Bill 1621 would require integrated delivery networks to contract with “any willing insurer.” This is a subtle twist on the “any willing provider” laws in many states, but in essence they are the same. I believe, as a student of health policy and management, that any type of “any willing insurer” or “any willing provider” law hinders competition and would be harmful to patients.

In theory, this bill would enable patients to visit any provider they wish by forcing the provider to accept the patients' insurance. However, myriad economic studies inform us that laws prohibiting exclusive networking between payer and provider only inhibit both parties' ability to compete and provide lower-cost services. The Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice have also stated that these types of laws harm patients by limiting discounts that can be passed on to consumers. In reality, this bill would probably result in collusion between insurance providers, raising costs and leaving patients with nowhere to go.

Brian Washburn


Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Letters

  1. States & secession
  2. Inspiring & welcome
  3. Catholicism & science
  4. Major issue, no action
  5. Outrageous & delusional
  6. Not one-sided
  7. USW not cause of ATI woes
  8. Seal the borders
  9. ‘Deflategate’ fault NFL’s
  10. Bright lines: Budget battle
  11. More health-care control