Given that insurance claims can determine if someone lives or dies I'm not very interested in parsing what the intent was in the, as you rightly say, byzantine halls of large insurers. What matters are outcomes, and these outcomes are nowhere near aligned with the patients best interests.
The sad reality is that the state must hold them to account because a few blog posts here and there is going to do nothing in the face of billions of dollars.
Edit: before anyone else bothers, I am fully aware that pointlessly complex state processes, greed, and corruption are part of why the regulations are so complicated. But, making them "simpler" doesn't change the profit motive: the only way to truly solve this problem is to provide a public option because currently patient outcomes aren't aligned with profit interests.
Most large insurers barely provide any insurance any more. Most of their customers are self insured employers. The "insurance" company just administers claims without bearing much risk. Approving a claim doesn't directly impact their profits. So their interests are better aligned with patients than you think.
The sad reality is that the state must hold them to account because a few blog posts here and there is going to do nothing in the face of billions of dollars.
Edit: before anyone else bothers, I am fully aware that pointlessly complex state processes, greed, and corruption are part of why the regulations are so complicated. But, making them "simpler" doesn't change the profit motive: the only way to truly solve this problem is to provide a public option because currently patient outcomes aren't aligned with profit interests.