MarketWatch: Report from Massachusetts: Employers largely support health care reform, and few signs of crowd-out appear

Health Affairs

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2008, Pages

  Gabel, Jon R ^a   Whitmore, Heidi ^b   Pickreign, Jeremy ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b NORC   (United States)

^c NORC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMPLOYEE; EMPLOYER; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH INSURANCE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; LAW; RESPONSIBILITY; UNITED STATES; ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; ECONOMICS; EMPLOYMENT; FEMALE; INSURANCE; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; EMPLOYMENT; FEMALE; HEALTH BENEFIT PLANS, EMPLOYEE; HEALTH CARE REFORM; HUMANS; MALE; MASSACHUSETTS; SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY; UNIVERSAL COVERAGE;

EID: 38849101043     PISSN: 02782715     EISSN: 02782715     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.27.1.w13     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. U.S. Census Bureau, Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division, Health Insurance Coverage: 2006, "Table 8: Number and Percentages of People without Health Insurance Coverage by State Using Three-Year Average: 2004 to 2006," http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/hlthin06/ p60no233_table8.pdf (accessed 19 October 2007).
2. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation, "Massachusetts Health Care Reform Bill Summary," 30 June 2006, http://www. bcbsmafoundation.org/foundationroot/en_US/documents/MassHCReformLawSummary.pdf (accessed 19 October 2007);
3. and J. Holahan and L. Blumberg, "Massachusetts Health Care Reform: A Look at the Issues," Health Affairs 25 (2006): w432-w443 (published online 14 September 2006; 10.1377/hlthaff.25.w432).
4. The interviewing of employers began in January 2007 and ended in July. On 1 July, all employers with eleven or more full-time-equivalent (FTE) employees in Massachusettswere required to offer a Section 125 plan. On 1 October, employers must make a "fair and reasonable" contribution toward an employee health plan or pay up to $295 per year per employee.
5. Both the RWJF/NORC and Kaiser/HRET surveys include single and multisite firms.
6. National numbers are from 2006.
7. Many small employers may be unaware of the simplicity and tax benefits of Section 125. The effect of not offering Section 125 benefits is that workers pay for premiums with after- rather than before-tax income.
8. COBRA allows former employees, retirees, and their spouses to purchase coverage at group rates from the former employer for eighteen months following termination of employment.
9. COBRA does not apply to firms with fewer than twenty workers.
10. "Wage offsets" refers to the actions of employers to offset the increased cost of a government mandate by reducing wages. In this case, employers that previously did not offer insurance are compensating for the mandated cost of contributions for health insurance by paying lower wages than firms would if there were no requirement to contribute for health insurance.
11. E. Haislmaier and N. Owcharenko, "The Massachusetts Approach: A New Way to Structure State Health Insurance Markets and Public Programs," Health Affairs 25, no. 6 (2006): 1580-1590.
12. S. Long and M.S. Marquis, "Low-Wage Workers and Health Insurance Coverage: Can Policymakers Target Them through Their Employers?" Inquiry 38, no. 3 (2001): 331-337;
13. and P. Cunningham, E. Schaefer, and C. Hogan, "Who Declines Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance and Is Uninsured?" Issue Brief no. 22, October 1999, http://www.hschange.org/CONTENT/46 (accessed 23 October 2007).
14. See L. Felland, D. Draper, and A. Liebhaber, "Massachusetts Health Reform: Employers, Lower-Wage Workers, and Universal Coverage," Issue Brief no. 113, July 2007, http://www.hschange.org/CONTENT/939 (accessed 23 October 2007).