The stage is set for the full House and Senate to take up health care
reform legislation.
After months of work, House Democratic leaders last week finished cobbling
together a 1,900-page reform bill, pulling provisions from measures that three
House committees passed this summer while amending, dropping and adding others,
including a cap on contributions to flexible spending accounts.
With that step, the full House is expected to begin debate on the bill later
this week and likely pass it at the end of the week, Washington observers
say.
The Senate is not quite as far along, with consideration of reform
legislation possibly to begin this week.
But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, last week announced a key
decision: The reform bill he will send to the Senate floor will include a public
option—a government-run health insurance plan.
A public option is part of the House reform bill, as well as an earlier bill
passed by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, but is not
in the measure approved by the Senate Finance Committee. Sen. Max Baucus,
D-Montana, the chairman of the Finance Committee, kept a public option out,
saying it lacked the votes to be approved by the full Senate.
Creation of a government-run plan has triggered enormous controversy. Its
advocates say a public option is needed to inject competition into the health
insurance market, while critics say a public plan would drive out private
insurers and self-funded employers from the market and result in a single-payer
health care system.
With both congressional branches moving ahead on reform measures, whose
central features include health insurance premium subsidies for the low-income
uninsured and penalties on employers that do not offer coverage, the odds of a
final agreement being reached—either later this year or early next year—continue
to improve, observers say.
“The Democrats control the House and Senate and the White House. They will
make it happen,” said Frank McArdle, a consultant with Hewitt Associates in
Washington.
Still, there are many battles to be fought and issues to be resolved.
“The last chapter certainly has not been written,” said Paul Dennett, senior
vice president of health care reform with the American Benefits Council in
Washington.
“We are nowhere near the end,” said Neil Trautwein, vice president and
employee benefits counsel with the National Retail Federation in Washington.
In fact, a looming battle—perhaps the most important one to date—soon will
play out on the Senate floor: whether a public option will be part of the reform
legislation.
Reid has provided few details on how the public option would work beyond
saying that states would have the right to opt out.
At the moment, though, observers doubt that Reid has the votes for a public
option.
“He is giving it the old college try, but I don’t see 60 votes for it,”
Trautwein said.
“I just don’t see where 60 votes would come from,” Dennett agreed.
In fact, Reid dodged answering questions at a news conference last week on
whether he thought there was enough support for the full Senate to pass a public
option, said James Gelfand, senior health care policy manager for the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce in Washington.
If Sen. Reid sees that he lacks the 60 votes needed to stop a certain
Republican-led filibuster on a public option, he might revamp the proposal to
try to attract enough votes. One way the public option might be revamped,
observers say, would be if it was triggered if health care costs exceed a
certain level or if studies find there is insufficient competition among health
insurers.
While the outcome of the public option battle won’t be known for some time,
employers already may have lost a battle on another reform provision: curbing
tax breaks for those who contribute to health care FSAs.
The House bill now includes a provision in which, starting in 2013, the
maximum pretax contributions an employee could make to an FSA would be $2,500.
That amount would be increased annually to match annual increases in the
Consumer Price Index.
That cap is somewhat similar to one embedded in the Finance Committee bill.
That panel also would cap FSA contributions at $2,500, though starting in 2011
and with no future indexing.
With an FSA tax cap expected to be included in the health care reform bill
Reid will send to the Senate floor, and the House bill also including an FSA
cap, the odds now are high that a cap will be part of the final bill.
Employers have embraced FSAs as a way for employees to pay for uncovered
health care-related expenses on a pretax basis, significantly cutting the true
cost for employees in higher tax brackets.
But employers prevailed on another issue: Excluded from the House bill is a
provision that would have allowed states to set up their own single-payer health
care systems.
Under current law, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act pre-empts
states from passing measures that relate to employee benefit plans. The
Education and Labor Committee provision, proposed by Rep. Dennis Kucinich,
D-Ohio, would have exempted state single-payer laws from ERISA pre-emption.
Other provisions in the measures approved by the House panels and opposed by
employers that made it in the bill that the full House will consider
include:
● Preventing employers with retiree health care plans from reducing benefits
unless they also cut benefits provided to employees. Experts previously said the
effect of such a requirement would be to accelerate the exodus of employers from
sponsoring retiree health care plans.
● Allowing COBRA beneficiaries to retain coverage far beyond what current law
requires. Under the measure, COBRA beneficiaries could continue coverage until
they become eligible for group coverage under a new employer’s plan or until
they become eligible for coverage through new state health insurance exchanges,
which the legislation would start in 2013.
Under current law, employees who terminate employment are entitled to up to
18 months of COBRA coverage, while employees’ dependents can obtain up to 36
months of coverage in situations involving death, divorce or marital
separation.
Filed by Jerry Geisel of