Over the last few decades the US has pushed hard for the creation of international trade bodies such as the WTO. the WTO's function is eliminating trade barriers, barriers that, for example, prevented large US health care companies from penetrating foreign markets. In exchange for access to the foreign markets, the trade agreements offer up US markets to multinationals in exchange. In order so those multinationals have a stable selling experience, THEY PRECLUDE MOST OTHER LAWS. The United States health care market, currently is not very open to foreign firms. But as soon as they can offer products across state lines they will probably enter our market.
If they do, then, immediately, certain provisions of WTO DOHA Round kick in, that make it a more hospitable situation for them. For example, if the states decide to change some law, and that results in the firm no longer being allowed to sell a product (say, a state passes single payer health care?) THEN, then, as the report explains, the US government can be sued in WTO tribunal and we can be required to reimburse the multinational NOT FOR THE VALUE OF THEIR CURRENT BUSINESS, BUT INSTEAD, FOR THE VALUE OF THEIR POTENTIAL BUSINESS.. Read more after the jump, where this is documented.
If the provisions in the HCR bills allowing interstate marketing of health plans are adopted, it may result in this WTO gotcha kicking in and preventing any future single payer approach - Does anybody know more about this? The most recent analysis Ive found is here.
This report "Presidential Candidates’ Key Proposals on Health Care and Climate Will Require WTO Modifications, Overreach of WTO Highlighted by Potential Conflicts with Candidates’ Non-Trade Proposals,"
is from 2008- during the campaign..Now, the interstate selling of insurance is in both the House and Senate bills.. Please read the WTO petitions from other nations asking that the US market be opened to them irreversibly.
So, unless we expressly negotiate this, its no more hope of single payer, with the WTO lock in.
"McCain Proposal for National Health Care Market Would Raise Cost of Removing U.S. Health Care from WTO Jurisdiction
McCain (Now, the Democrats) has proposed the development of a "national health care market" that would facilitate entry of more foreign health care providers and thus make it far more costly for the United States to withdraw the health care sector from WTO jurisdiction. While McCain has provided few details about the proposal, implementing a real national insurance market would inherently require greatly reducing the role of states, for instance with the federal government taking control of licensing and standards now under state authority. Pre-empting the authority of U.S. states in this area is a key demand of foreign insurance companies in the context of the WTO’s Doha Round of negotiations.43 and this leaked document.
European and other foreign insurance firms have long considered U.S. state-level regulation of the insurance market to be a market access barrier because it requires that they must obtain licenses in each of the 50 states in order to provide insurance services on a national basis.44
Since the insurance sector and health services are already covered under the GATS, new federal law that would preempt such existing state authority would facilitate the entry of foreign service-providers into the U.S. market. Once the flood gates are open and many foreign health insurance and health service providers are in the U.S. market, it would be significantly more costly for future administrations to remove the health care sector from WTO coverage, as all WTO nations with firms in the U.S. market or with an interest in the market would have to be compensated under WTO rules.45
Unless U.S. health care services are withdrawn from coverage under various trade rules, federal and state governments’ future abilities to effectively regulate the delivery of health care services, implement health care reform measures designed to expand access, and reduce the cost of health care could be stymied.
Because the United States must provide compensation under WTO rules before removing U.S. health care policy from WTO jurisdiction, quick action to do so will be much less costly, before more foreign insurance and health care providers enter the U.S. market."
References for the above:
42 WTO, General Agreement on Trade in Services, Article I:3(c).
43 In 2003, the European Commission’s "request" negotiating document to the United States was leaked. In this undated
document, the EC asks the United States to adopt a policy that would allow foreign insurance firms to apply for one
national license. available at "Gats 2000 Request From the EC and Its Member States (Hereinafter The EC) To The United States Of
America" (no date),. Similarly a USTR document listing GATS
requests by many nations that impact states was leaked in 2003 and lists similar requests from Brazil "GATS Requests by States" (no date)
44 For more information, see the European Union’s data base on market access barriers to trade, "Insurance Market
Fragmentation and Collateral Requirement for the United States," updated Jan. 2, 2008,
45 WTO GATS Article XXI requires compensation to other affected WTO signatories when a service sector is withdrawn
from WTO jurisdiction.
That seems clear. We need to keep our eyes open, this WTO treaty obligation could be a huge trap for Americans future prosperity.