1. If you are talking about AARP as a membership group - the only ones that would possibly need individual health insurance would be those few who are 50 - 64 who do not have employer (subsidized) coverage.
2. Most of this membership when they hit 65 are eligible for Medicare.
3. Since this targeted group (50 - 64 year olds) are older - stats show that they tend to be somewhat less healthy and there would be no younger generations added into the sassocialtion coverage to balance out that fact - thus premiums would be higher.
4. Actual health care is LOCAL in nature - so for a "national" type association, it would be difficult to set up networks of providers to maximize cost efficiencies.
And last but not least . . . . .
The Courts have shot down the concept mainly because there is no place to put them into current regulation - They wouldn't be individual coverage, they could not be grouped into the small employer marketplace nor within the large employer marketplace regulated by ERISA. The closest thing that is currently sanctioned as an Association Health Plan (AHP) would be the MediShare type plans which aren't health insurance. Rather they are health care cost sharing associations and thus can refuse to cover pre-exisiting conditions as a way to control those health sharing cost.
We have a very complicated health care (insurance) system - there are lots of player - from government to private coverage - Medicare, Medicaid, Military system, VA Health System, Indian Healthcare System, Employer based coverage, Individual Marketplace. They are all suffering from one major problem - the cost of health care. Until we tackle that elephant in the room (the cost of healthcare), we aren't gonna really get anywhere. I am not just talking about limiting what is charged for health care by (whatever) provider but stop paying for things that don't work and pay for the things that are the best value for our bucks.