|
A new Massachusetts law designed to make health insurance coverage
nearly universal in the Bay State has a chance to succeed in pioneering
a broad new approach to health insurance policy if it is properly
implemented, a leading taxpayer advocate from Massachusetts told
Council members on May 10.
"When this law was enacted earlier this year, it had broad
support from health insurance providers, businesses, advocacy groups
that generally support higher health-care spending, taxpayer groups,
and political leadership on all sides of the political spectrum,"
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation
and a key player in designing the bill, said at a meeting of the
Council's Health Committee.
Widmer discussed the political and policy consideration that shaped
the bill and described it in detail. He was joined in his presentation
by Victoria Burgess, a health-policy analyst with the foundation.
For the Massachusetts plan to succeed, the state must find a good,
experienced public-sector manager to administer the new "connector"
that will manage the health insurance market, and it must also issue
thorough, clear regulations promptly, he added.
The new law, which contrasts sharply with controversial health
insurance policy steps being considered in New York State, requires
individuals to buy health insurance coverage, imposes a new assessment
on some businesses that offer no health insurance benefits, and
creates a new entity called a health insurance "connector"
to link individual and businesses with a range of health insurance
products.
Widmer outlined several of factors that helped create a strong
climate for this aggressive innovation, including:
-- Strong support for some kind of reform on the part of Massachusetts
Governor Mitt Romney, a Republican, as well as the leaders of the
state's House and Senate, both Democrats. The Governor appointed
a respected Democratic professional with legislative staff experience
in charge of shaping a policy recommendation; both the House and
the Senate introduced their own aggressive proposals for health
insurance policy changes.
-- The timely publication of a thorough study, by the Blue Cross
and Blue Shield Foundation, on how access to health care might be
broadened.
-- The need in Massachusetts to address federal government concerns
about how the state was reimbursed for its Medicaid spending. The
federal government had been warning that it would discontinue reimbursing
the Bay State for some expenditures the state had been billing to
Medicaid.
-- A decision by advocates of higher health care spending to make
some health-care reform a priority in 2006, and their successful
effort to complete the first step of a petition process that would
have put onto the statewide ballot a referendum that could create
broad health insurance policy changes, including a new payroll tax.
Several factors make Massachusetts ideally suited for an aggressive
and creative approach to reform, Widmer said. These include employer-based
coverage that is broader than the national average, a broader program
of Medicaid spending, and the availability of an existing "uncompensated
care pool" that covers hospital costs for the uninsured.
Taxpayer dollars that fund the pool have been reallocated under
Massachusetts's new plan, Widmer said. "If we had been required
to raise this level of funds from scratch, the whole idea would
have been a non-starter," he noted.
The Massachusetts plan emphasizes covering about 95 percent of
Massachusetts's 530,000 uninsured residents. The program's core
elements are:
-- A requirement that individual residents obtain health insurance.
Beginning in July 2007, all adults must get and keep health coverage
if an affordable product is available or lose their personal income
tax exemption.
The following July, those who fail to comply will be charged up
to half of the cost of the minimum insurance premium for each uncovered
month.
-- Steps to increase employers' responsibility to offer some health
insurance benefits. Beginning in October 2006, employers with 11
or more FTEs who don't contribute to their employees' health insurance
will pay an annual assessment of $295 per employee.
In addition, beginning the following January, employers with 11
or more FTEs will be required to offer (but not necessarily contribute
to the costs of) a "Section 125" plan to their employers.
This refers to Section 125 of the federal Internal Revenue Code,
which allows employees to put pre-tax dollars into accounts from
which they can pay health-care and/or child-care expenses.
By October 2007, these employers who do not offer such a plan will
be liable for a "free-rider surcharge" of up to 100 percent
of costs if their employees all told use more than $50,000 worth
of free care in the fiscal year.
-- Creation of a new entity called a "connector" to help
employers and individuals offer and buy health insurance. This quasi-public
agency will facilitate the administration and purchase of insurance.
Small businesses will be able to offer multiple, affordable health
insurance products. Premiums will be paid with pre-tax dollars,
and minimum participation and contribution thresholds will be eliminated.
Under this model, health insurance will be purchased by individuals,
not employers, and employers that choose to contribute to this costs
will do so on a definited-contribution model. Health insurance will
be portable between small businesses.
-- Creation of subsidized and low-cost health insurance programs.
Beginning in October of 2006, uninsured residents with household
incomes below 300 percent of the federal poverty level will be eligible
for a subsidized health insurance plan to be offered by the state's
four Medicaid managed care organizations.
Beginning in July 2007, small-group and individual insurance markets
will be merged, which is expected to reduce the cost of individual
policies by some 25 percent.
New products will be offered to residents aged 19 to 26, with lower
risks for that age ranged expected to produce lower premiums.
Insurers will be able to craft plans with high deductibles, defined
networks, and/or higher co-pays to achieve greater savings.
-- Implementation of mechanisms designed to help control costs.
For example, the plan eliminates the state's uncompensated care
pool and replaces it with a fund that will compensate hospitals
on a standard fee schedule as oppose to the current charge-based
system.
The plan also will create a consumer Web site with cost and quality
data, and it will encourage insurers to compete on price as individuals
and employers gain access to a broader range of products.
|