The three counter-arguments that make the most sense to me: 1) One proposal was to allow insurance companies to compete across state lines. This would allow s

The three counter-arguments that make the most sense to me: 1) One proposal was to allow insurance companies to compete across state lines. This would allow smaller contenders to make their offerings on a larger scale, and sidestep the Alabama issue you mention. 2) The point here, I think, is that your brother shouldn't "have" to pay for insurance at all. Allowing individuals to receive the same tax breaks on insurance as businesses do would allow people to choose their own plans, open up the market more, and allow more consumer choice. 3) This is the first I've heard of this one. I find it hard to imagine not wanting to cure a disease... even in the nastiest, greed-driven environment, I think the byline "We cured colon cancer!" is worth more money any amount of incremental profit from treatments. So yeah, going to go with the conspiracy kook option on this one. :)