PRIORITY ISSUE: Health
Insurance Mandates and “Pay or Play Taxes”
Status:
The Assembly has introduced A. 2912 to require all health insurance
policies to
provide full coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders.
06/20/05 - passed Assembly
06/20/05
- referred to Senate Rules Legislative memo in support
S.1372 - passed in Senate
A.6193: in Assembly Insurance Committee |
|
Legislators like to pass new health insurance mandates. They don't require
any money from the state treasury and they appeal to groups - often providers
of the service - who call for the new coverages. The Business Council is
not opposed to most of the services that are being requested; rather we oppose
forcing all health insurance policies to be overly-expansive. The incremental
build-up of the mandates over the past two decades are one of the reasons
that health insurance in New York State is about 25% higher than the national
average.
There are a range of other punishing tax proposals that would be counterproductive
to helping small business buy health insurance for their workers, including:
- Play or pay, where a small business who could not afford to buy health
insurance for their workers would be taxed on a per-head basis. The money
generated under some schemes would not even go towards purchasing health
insurance.
- An obesity tax.
- A tax on health insurance plan surplus.
Mandated benefits -- proposed Timothy's Law - The Business Council opposes
the Assembly's expansive mental health mandate because it is expensive
and, if passed, would further drive up health-insurance costs and increase
the total number of uninsured New Yorkers.
This bill would require that every insurance policy in the state provide
full coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders, including
nervous disorders, emotional disorders, and dependency on alcohol or other
drugs. The bill would also mandate that policies impose no limits on the
coverage of mental disorders that are not imposed on physical disorders.
If passed, the mandate would add at least $200 million to skyrocketing insurance
costs. That $200 million is in addition to $130 million in new taxes, fees,
and “assessments” on health care that are part of the state budget.
The bill is cost-prohibitive for most businesses. Companies that believe
they would like to- and can afford to- offer a higher level of mental health
benefits already can buy an insurance rider. Many insurance plans offer mental
health and substance-abuse benefits.
Already the state has over 30 mandated benefits that significantly increase
the cost of health insurance. The average family in New York pays more than
$1,000 per year to cover the cost of mandated services, according to a recent
study by the Employer Alliance for Affordable Health Care.
Passing this new mandate would increase premiums by another 3 percent, according
to the study. Moreover, there is not a consensus that mandating full mental-health
coverage would be the most effective health-policy option.
“This [mandate] could lead individuals to receive services that are
not shown to be effective or have been shown to be ineffective leading to
wasted health care dollars and false hope,” said Donna Novak, author
of the Employer Alliance study.
Employers in the state will face the real possibility of dropping coverage
or passing the cost along to employees as rates continue to rise. These added
costs will also contribute to an increase of uninsured New Yorkers - a figure
that already stands at more than three million. As health insurance becomes
more expensive, New Yorkers drop out of insurance plans because the cost,
even when shared with their employer, is too high.
In 2000, the legislature recognized what rising health-care costs mean to
small businesses by enacting Healthy New York. Passing this new burdensome
mandate flies in the face of that initiative and further burdens small businesses
that already buy health insurance, and by definition are not eligible to
buy into Healthy New York.
The Business Council is supporting efforts to create a health-benefit cost
commission. This commission would study the cost and effectiveness of all
proposed health care mandates. Twenty-two other states have mandate review
boards that serve the same function. The absence of a commission in New York
is problematic. Advocates who support this new mental-health mandate maintain
that the new burden would affect premium costs only minimally. But a variety
of expert groups have estimated that it could drive up premiums as much as
3-5 percent. Enacting a health-benefit commission would help legislators
accurately estimate the true costs of mandates before enacting them.