No, he is wrong because we are already paying for people with preexisting conditions. I'm guessing you don't know enough about insurance to know that companies are "medically rated" for their insurance quotes. If they have an employee that has had cancer they are going to pay more for their insurance than another business that has not. It's one of the reasons so many businesses discriminate against older people. The thing is this idiot is the insurance commissioner and he should know this. Either he is a complete idiot or another example of "fleecing the rubes".

If cars must be used it's like buying a lemon, but never having the ability to get trade up.  An accident in both cases is just that, an accident.  An error in judgement that is generally not normal or reoccurring.  Plus, you can't buy health insurance on your way to the hospital or mechanic after an accident, that is just beyond stoooopid.

But knowing there is a reoccurring brake problem without being able to get the parts would be a far better analogy to per-existing conditions.  Which I might add, if you ever switched auto insurance, they generally make you bring it in to ensure there is no previous damage, or what us humans would call per-existing conditions.  So that non-sense doesn't float with cars either.

I would also add that the cost of maintaining/fixing repairing an automobile car is a fraction of the cost of maintaining a human being, meaning that not many folks are going into bankruptcy over repair bills for their car.  Not true of human beings.

The problem of course, is unlike automobiles, once a person has something like a life-long disease, it is impossible to take it to a mechanic/doctor and get it fixed.  More like failing emissions testing with no catalytic converters for that car available, so the issue doesn't ever go away, it can only be tweaked to run as efficiently as possible, but it may never pass emissions.

And one last point, most cars come with warranties right out of the box, making vehicles like mine warrantied for good portion of their useful lifetimes.  My truck is good to go until 06/2015 or 100k miles, no BS, and a $50 deductible/copay.  No secret charges or denial of coverage, $50 per issue for what I would imagine here in Houston is almost the entire expected lifetime of the vehicle.  My responsibility is maintenance, which I would add was covered for the 6 years, 72k I believe.  And the costs, built into the price, doesn't cost a me a nickle, hasn't since I paid it off a couple years ago.

No analogy for humans, maybe single payer if everyone had it since the moment of conception.

But car analogies, like cars, sometimes break down.

In the case of "I want to buy insurance that covers the accident I just had", an adjuster can take a look and know what it's going to cost the insurance company to fix the car. However much it's going to be, they know going in that it's going to be that much and then that's the end of the cost of that particular accident.

In the case of pre-existing medical conditions, some educated guesses can be made about how much the person will cost the insurance company in the future, but it can't be known for sure.

Maybe that cancer will come back, maybe it won't.

Maybe the expensive drug regimen the person is expected to have to be on for the rest of their life will be supplanted by some new, less expensive drug, or an actual cure for the condition will be discovered.

And someone without a pre-existing condition may have something go wrong tomorrow that'll cost the insurance company a king's ransom over the years.

So the car analogy might be to the policy seeker who didn't just have an accident they want covered but does have a horrible driving record that doesn't guarantee that they'll be a net loss for the insurance company but is a strong indicator that they might very well be.

If you compare a car analogy to a car, is that a car analogy?

Believe it or not, after the initial shock of the temperature change, I enjoy the walk as much as she does. There isn't any ice on the street or sidewalk -- it's been too cold for the snow to melt during the day.