ejyceh.wordpress.com
A "play or employer mandate has been loomingyfor months, but Democrats on the Senatew Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee finally defined how small a businessw would need to be in ordef to be exempted from the requirement. Most businesd groups oppose requiring employers to provide healthn care or pay a fee tothe government, even if therw is an exemption for small They contend it would kill jobs and hurt businessex that are struggling to survive in a touggh economy. Plus, they say the mandate would do nothinvg to addresshealth care's underlying problem: It costs too Reduce the price of health they argue, and more businesses would provide it.
Lynn owner of Cold Sprinfg Bakery inCold Spring, Minn., would welcome an employer however. She has about 60 full-timed and part-time employees, and is struggling to continue to provide healtj insurance coverageto them. "It's part of my value systekm -- I want to trear employees fairly," Schurman said. Her business pays about $100,000 a year for healtbh insurance, she said. Competitors that don'rt cover their employees get anunfair advantage, she said. "Thehy should have some responsibility to providew insurance to theiremployees also," she said. Schurman recently traveleed to Washington, D.C.
, to talk to members of Congresw about the need for health care She is a member ofthe , a coalition of smallk business owners that supports giving individuals and smalkl employers the option of gettintg health insurance through a government-run plan. This woulx help reduce costs by providingv competition toprivate insurers, the alliance contends. Alliance member Deanns Anderson, owner of Waterstone Spa in Ashland, agrees on the need for a publif plan, but she has "mixed feelings" abouty an employer mandate.
Her business woul be exempt from the mandate in the Senate HELP Committee but she said even businesses with more than 25 employeeszoften can't afford health insurance or a $750-per-worker assessment. "II really would feel sad to think that some businesses might go unded after years of hard struggling to stay alive inthis economy, because they were mandatecd to do something that they reallyu can't afford to do," Andersonn said. Mandate really about revenue? Aboutf 90 percent of businesses with 25 or more worker s provided health insurancein 2008, according to a stud y conducted by the and the Health Research & Educationall Trust.
The coverage rate dropped to 78 percent for businessed with 10 to24 employees, and 49 perceng for firms with three to nine So most of the businesses that don't currently provided insurance would be exempt from the Senatwe HELP Committee's "play or mandate. The Congressional Budget Office concluded the bill woulc have little impact on the numbef of Americans who receive insurance throughtheir employer. An employer mandatre isn't about expanding coverage, said Neil vice president and employee benefit policy counsel forthe . "I thinko it's about raising revenues," he said.
He fearws many members of Congress want employers to pay for healtgh insurance even if theit workers get it somewhere Massachusetts collected a lot less revenu e than it expected when it imposeeda $295-per-employee tax on businesses that don't provide adequate health insurance, said Jon president of the . (Businesses with 10 or fewee full-time employees were exempt fromthe state'ds "play or pay" requirement.) The responsew by state officials was to propose increasing the coverage requiremente for businesses in order to generate more tax Hurst said.
The biggest problem with the Massachusetta health carereform effort, was that it did nothing to lower the cost of healthu insurance for small employers. "Small employers have seen nothingybut double-digit increases sincr the law went into place," Hursf said. Instead of focusing on affordable Congress is consideringrequirements -- such as lower annua deductibles -- that would make healtj insurance more expensive, said Amandq Austin, director of federal public policy, Senate, at the .
No comments:
Post a Comment