|
|
|
 |
|
Home / Washington Business - July/August 2006 / Missed opportunities mark session’s record on health care |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Missed opportunities mark session’s record on health care |
|
|
|
Written On: July/August 2006 |
|
|
|
Written By: by Mellani McAleenan - AWB Governmental Affairs Director |
|
|
|
Health care costs have continually risen at double-digit rates year after year, making coverage virtually impossible to afford for many small businesses. While there is no "silver-bullet" solution to the health care crisis in Washington, there are a number of ways Washington can begin to regain control of this problem. The 2006 Legislature had the opportunity to take meaningful steps toward reducing the costs of health care to small employers but, disappointingly, they refused to take it.
What passed
HB 2572 creates the Small Employer Health Insurance Partnership Program, which provides premium assistance to low-income employees. However, it requires the employer to purchase the overly expensive, overly mandated Basic Health Plan or equivalent plans to qualify for the subsidy. The program will require the employer to pay for 40 percent of the cost, with the state and the employee picking up the remaining 60 percent on a need-based scale.
AWB asked a number of our small employers what they would like the state Legislature to do to help them afford health care coverage. Their first answer was never a state subsidy. They asked for tax incentives and more flexibility in plan design to allow them to choose a plan that would meet the needs of their employees at a price they could afford.
They wanted the Legislature to look at the root causes for the high cost of health care, but felt that premium assistance was better than no help at all. However, many said that the most they could afford per employee per month is $100. Many said $50-$75 per month was their maximum. With the BHP equivalency requirement, the cost for the employer is still just over $100, so many will still not be able to afford to take advantage of the program in the form it passed the Legislature.
The bill originally appropriated $600,000 for administrative startup costs and only $1 million in premium assistance funds. This amount would have covered only a couple of thousand employees. However, the state budget appropriated the $600,000 for administration, but no funds for premium assistance this year. Thus, the program will be designed, but funds will not be available for premium assistance until the next appropriation cycle.
What could have passed
Premium assistance is not a long-term solution to the high costs of health care. The missed opportunity that was HB 2572 should not be underestimated. The bill originated in the House of Representatives in the form described above. The Senate returned to the House a bi-partisan solution to the health care crisis faced by small employers.
As amended by the Senate, the bill would have retained the ability of small employers to choose which small group plan meets the needs of their employees at a price they can afford, rather than requiring they purchase a plan as expensive as the BHP in order for their employees to qualify. It specifically allowed subsidies for health savings accounts. It created a B&O tax deduction for small employers who provide health care coverage for their employees. It allowed carriers to offer health plans with a limited set of benefits, rather than just the expensive all-or-nothing plans currently allowed under state law, and it allowed health savings accounts to be rated differently than other small group plans in order to minimize their costs. In short, it did everything AWB’s small employers have been requesting for years.
The Senate amendments created the meaningful health care reform employers have been desperately seeking. Unfortunately, under the guise of procedural correctness, the House Democrats, in a party-line vote, stripped the bill of all of the essential changes made by the Senate and returned the bill to its original form. Assuming that they were correct about the technicality, who would have challenged it? The small businesses who were finally able to afford to provide health care to their employees? The employees who were able to receive coverage, perhaps for the first time? Unlikely.
To come so close to meaningful reform and have it snatched away again is tragic. The Association of Washington Business and our thousands of small employers are very disappointed that there will be no relief from the state’s onerous, expensive health care laws for at least one more year.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
