That is, to start with, a very big "if". It seems safe to say that, even at the time, the number of insurers was nowhere near sufficient (in any given geograph

That is, to start with, a very big "if". It seems safe to say that, even at the time, the number of insurers was nowhere near sufficient (in any given geographic area). That number is even lower today, something feared by the law's critics. There are some other shaky assumptions built in, as well, including the one that price alone is enough to win more business, even assuming identical/equivalent networks (another shaky assumption). A reputation for terrible claims practices might be enough to dissuade someone from saving that extra $3/month in premiums.