Thursday, February 03, 2005
Bush will target health care next: Employers off the hook?
RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR; Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON – Emboldened by their success at the polls, the Bush administration and Republican leaders in Congress believe they have a new opportunity to move the nation away from the system of employer-provided health insurance that has covered most working Americans for the last half-century.
In its place, they want to erect a system in which workers – instead of looking to employers for health insurance – would take personal responsibility for protecting themselves and their families: They would buy high-deductible “catastrophic” insurance policies to cover major medical needs, then pay routine costs with money set aside in tax-sheltered health savings accounts.
Elements of that approach have been on the conservative agenda for years, but what has suddenly put it on the fast track is GOP confidence that the political balance of power has changed.
With Democratic strength reduced, President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and House Ways and Means committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) are pushing for action.
Supporters of the new approach, who see it as part of Bush’s “ownership society,” say workers and their families would become more careful users of health care if they had to pay the bills.
Also, they say, the lower premiums on high-deductible plans would make coverage affordable for the uninsured and for small businesses.
Critics say the Republican approach is really an attempt to shift the risks, massive costs and knotty problems of health care from employers to workers. And they say the GOP is moving forward with far less public attention or debate than have surrounded Bush’s plans to overhaul Social Security.
Health savings accounts, known as HSAs, have already been approved. They were created as a little-noticed appendage to the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill.
HSAs have had a strong start in the marketplace. Although regulations spelling out how they would work were not issued until mid-2004, as of Sept. 30, about 440,000 people had signed up. And more than one-quarter of employers say they are likely to offer them as an option.
The accounts are available only to people who buy high-deductible health insurance, either through an employer or individually. Consumers can set aside tax-free an amount equal to their deductible. Employers can contribute to workers’ HSAs but do not have to. Unused balances can be rolled over from year to year, and employees take their HSAs with them when they switch jobs.
The idea that losing one’s job would not automatically mean losing protection for medical costs has bipartisan appeal.
“Portability” was a key feature of President Clinton’s ill-fated health care reform plan. But the GOP approach is significantly different: Whereas Clinton would have required all employers to chip in for universal health insurance, Bush wants to leave responsibility primarily to individuals.
“This is certainly getting a lot of attention from employers,” said Jack Rodgers, a health care analyst for PricewaterhouseÂCoopers LLP.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/4508295p-4233706c.html
WASHINGTON – Emboldened by their success at the polls, the Bush administration and Republican leaders in Congress believe they have a new opportunity to move the nation away from the system of employer-provided health insurance that has covered most working Americans for the last half-century.
In its place, they want to erect a system in which workers – instead of looking to employers for health insurance – would take personal responsibility for protecting themselves and their families: They would buy high-deductible “catastrophic” insurance policies to cover major medical needs, then pay routine costs with money set aside in tax-sheltered health savings accounts.
Elements of that approach have been on the conservative agenda for years, but what has suddenly put it on the fast track is GOP confidence that the political balance of power has changed.
With Democratic strength reduced, President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and House Ways and Means committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) are pushing for action.
Supporters of the new approach, who see it as part of Bush’s “ownership society,” say workers and their families would become more careful users of health care if they had to pay the bills.
Also, they say, the lower premiums on high-deductible plans would make coverage affordable for the uninsured and for small businesses.
Critics say the Republican approach is really an attempt to shift the risks, massive costs and knotty problems of health care from employers to workers. And they say the GOP is moving forward with far less public attention or debate than have surrounded Bush’s plans to overhaul Social Security.
Health savings accounts, known as HSAs, have already been approved. They were created as a little-noticed appendage to the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill.
HSAs have had a strong start in the marketplace. Although regulations spelling out how they would work were not issued until mid-2004, as of Sept. 30, about 440,000 people had signed up. And more than one-quarter of employers say they are likely to offer them as an option.
The accounts are available only to people who buy high-deductible health insurance, either through an employer or individually. Consumers can set aside tax-free an amount equal to their deductible. Employers can contribute to workers’ HSAs but do not have to. Unused balances can be rolled over from year to year, and employees take their HSAs with them when they switch jobs.
The idea that losing one’s job would not automatically mean losing protection for medical costs has bipartisan appeal.
“Portability” was a key feature of President Clinton’s ill-fated health care reform plan. But the GOP approach is significantly different: Whereas Clinton would have required all employers to chip in for universal health insurance, Bush wants to leave responsibility primarily to individuals.
“This is certainly getting a lot of attention from employers,” said Jack Rodgers, a health care analyst for PricewaterhouseÂCoopers LLP.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/4508295p-4233706c.html
# posted by The Alabama Hammer @ Thursday, February 03, 2005 
