CBO: Health Bill Would Increase Employer-Based Coverage

By: Stephanie Condon
Topics: Health Care

(AP)

A government agency released a letter Sunday explaining that, contrary to Republican criticisms, the House Democrats' proposed health care legislation would increase the number of citizens who receive health insurance through their employers.

The results of the Congressional Budget Office's preliminary analysis were detailed in a letter to Rep. Dave Camp, the ranking Republican of the House Ways and Means Committee, after Republicans sought additional information about about the effects the bill would have on private versus public insurance enrollment, the effects on private-sector premiums, and other issues.

Conservatives have charged that the creation of a government-sponsored health insurance option, or "public plan," would result in many Americans losing their current, employer-based coverage. The CBO's analysis concludes that by 2016, about 9 million people who would otherwise have had employer-based coverage would not be enrolled in an employment-based plan under the House plan. However, about 12 million people who currently are not offered employer-based coverage would receive it, resulting in a net increase of 3 million Americans with employer-provided care.

Firms would have incentive to provide coverage for their employers, the CBO concludes, since they would face penalties for not doing so. Furthermore, if employers did not offer insurance, they would likely have to offer higher wages and other forms of compensation for employees to keep up in a competitive labor market.

"Indeed, workers might be particularly motivated to demand such increases under the proposal because they would be required to obtain insurance," the CBO letter says.

On top of that, since workers currently do not pay income or payroll taxes on employer-provided insurance, any compensation to make up for a lack of insurance would have to cover the additional cost of taxes.

The letter indicates the CBO is uncertain of the impact the bill will have on premiums, but it lists some factors that could decrease costs. For instance, the average cost of covering enrollees could drop, since Americans would presumably be healthier as a result of having greater access to care.

Stephanie Condon
Stephanie Condon is a political reporter for CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

2 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

by cinci_citizen July 27, 2009 5:42 PM EDT

Some care more about defeating Obama than they do about providing Health care for Americans. It is political, not ethical. If you are for Health Care you are called a socialist. If you are against the Iraq war then you are plain UN-American. It is amazing the labels that will be put upon you to stop you from pursuing something that is right.
I have heard it said that the Government will stand between you and your doctor if we elect a Public Health Care option when the only people who are between me and my doctor are Insurance Companies and certain political parties.
I?ve also heard it said the millions of people who are uninsured in this country are ?Mexicans?. Well, spoken like a true party of hate, however it simply isn?t true. A nice old man lived next to me who had been faithfully paying into his insurance company for forty years developed throat cancer. His Insurance Company refused payment. He fought them, but he died before his case got to court. He was as ?American? as they come and his story is not unique. This is happening all over America. No PROFIT based insurance company should be between us and our doctors, as they are right now.
Finally, I have heard some political parties claim that everyone?s taxes will increase. Well, that is not what our President said; it is what a political party is saying as an attempt to defeat Obama and the American people. The proposal, as it stands, will increase taxes on anyone making over $350,000 a year. That probably does not apply to anyone reading this post.
We need a Public Health Care option to compete with the insurance companies and I don?t care if the insurance companies don?t like it. The Public Health care option has my vote.
WATCH SiCKO with Michael Moore it will explain a lot about Health Care. WARNING, some people won?t want you to see it!

Reply to this comment


by poorman48 July 27, 2009 8:50 PM EDT: The media has already disclosed an increase in taxes on middle class Americans making less than $100,000 a year. My husband and I together make just under that TOGETHER. We both just took a cut in hours and I have no more money to give to the Government. If we werent spending so much money on people who never worked a day in their life Medicaid welfare kids having kids frug addicts, that poor old man that you talk of would have not had to worry about his insurance. But the more people who expect (illegals, welfare recepients, drug addicts and the others who feel just exhausted and have found a dr to sign them up for disability) to get food lodging and healthcare at the governments expense who do you suppose has to work to pay for that. Frankly, I am tired of working to pay for them. I work at a county hospital and I see all these people who because they are having babies, sign up for the good ole govt programs, that dont cost Them a dime. I have a 70 yr old mother who is still working cleaning for people to provide for 2 teenagers that were abandoned by both drug addict parents who have never been forced to pay anything and dont hesitate to try to stick that hand out for themselves. I have plenty other examples to share. Got any questions for me? Go right ahead I have some answers, for one you need to get off your cloud and come visit reality!!!!!! Besides Michael Moore is a SICKO!!!!