Right. It will take a massive effort, and the insurance lobby will heavily oppose it.
However, after BT was killed,
Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield reversed its decision to implement limited payment on anesthesia based on the amount of time
it thought a surgery should take.
Was that decision related? Almost certainly, although BCBS was under a lot of pressure over that decision.
The fact LM was privileged probably weighs more in his favor (with his supporters) than against him because they will see it as he had more to lose than the average guy--and he did it for them. MOO
The more I read about it -- the more I think LM carried out this killing strictly for himself, with no altruistic concerns. I think he was angry at the pain he'd suffered and may suffer for the rest of his life, and he wanted someone to pay for that.
But a large segment of society is standing behind him, thinking he sacrificed his freedom for their well-being. We do have some political entities, like Chris Murphy, the US Senator from Connecticut, who are already calling for changes.
However, all that could simmer on a backburner unless we see some copycat crimes, in which case it might have a bigger effect. Eventually, I think we'll see big changes in the insurance industry--there's another thread here on WS about insurance stories--but that will likely be the result of outcry against the insurers more than LM's killing of BT.
All just MOO.