I am looking at a law which motivation I don't understand:
Rules for coordination of benefits.
(1) When a person is covered by two or more plans, the rules for determining the order of benefit payments are as follows:
(a) The primary plan must pay or provide its benefits as if the secondary plan or plans did not exist.
I'm pretty sure there are some historical records about how this rule was born. I mean, the discussions about the rule before it was legislated. Could anyone point to those?
I'd really like to know why is the person covered by more than one insurance can't choose which insurance to use first, if that same exact person is paying for the insurance company service. That doesn't make much sense to me, but I'm a first generation immigration and know to little about the US law in general. This seems to be violating the ideas of private property in my mind -- one is not in control of own money when uses publicly available services.