Experiment, change tax code to cover mor

Comment: I have ready posted this article in my monthly newsletter but since this information does not seem to normally be distributed to the general public, I have reposted it here. This article discusses some of the differences between President Obama’s healthcare campaign promises and nominee for Secretary of Health & Human Services briefs on healthcare plans.

By Ed Feulner From News Services Wednesday, December 31, 2008

During his presidential campaign, President-elect Barack Obama promised to help uninsured Americans obtain coverage.

But, “if you already have health insurance, the only thing that will change under my plan is that we will lower your premiums,” he told an audience in Canton, Ohio, in October. “If you don’t have health insurance, you’ll be able to get the same kind of health insurance that members of Congress give themselves.”

Unfortunately, that promise could be undermined by Obama’s nominee to be secretary of health and human services. Former Sen. Tom Daschle advocates creating a Federal Health Board to oversee the one-sixth of the American economy that’s spent on health care.

That’s a bad idea. Moreover, it directly violates Obama’s pledge that Americans will be able to retain the same kind of coverage —- and coverage choices —- they have now.

In his recent book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis,” Daschle proposes a Federal Health Board that would “help define evidence-based benefits and lower overall spending by determining which medicines, treatments and procedures are most effective and identifying those that do not justify their high price tags.” In other words, an omnipotent board of experts would determine which drugs, tests and medical treatments will —- or will not —- be approved for coverage. Patients and their doctors wouldn’t have any say in the matter.

Daschle certainly sounds a different note from his future boss. While Obama insisted patients would remain in control of decisions regarding their health, the potential HHS secretary acknowledges, “Doctors and patients might resent any encroachment on their ability to choose certain treatments.” As well they should, since each patient deserves to be treated as an individual, not as a medical condition.

The former senator writes that even he has some worries. The power of the board he advocates “is not small, and delegation over health policy decisions rightly raises concerns,” he writes.

Still, Daschle supports massive interference in the health-care market, interference that could eventually affect virtually everyone.

There’s a better way to cover more Americans.

First, the Obama administration should ask Congress to change the way the tax code treats health insurance. Today, employers get unlimited tax relief for the coverage it provides to employees, but families without coverage through work don’t enjoy similar benefits.

Experts on the left and the right agree this should be changed, by capping the benefit an employer may deduct and by providing direct assistance, either in the form of a voucher or a refundable tax credit, to help lower-income workers buy private coverage.

Lawmakers could also expand coverage by exploring something called “auto-enrollment.” There are certainly working Americans who cannot afford to buy health insurance. But for some, the reason they aren’t in a plan is because they never get around to signing up. Even worse, there are some who figure they can always get care at an emergency room, so having insurance isn’t a real concern for them.

If workers were automatically enrolled in their company’s health care coverage, and were required to actively decline coverage if they didn’t want it, many more Americans would have private coverage.

Finally, the federal government should encourage states to experiment with new ways to cover their citizens. If Washington made it possible, states could restructure programs and find creative ways to expand insurance.

The president-elect can and certainly should keep his campaign promise to expand health insurance coverage —- only by expanding the private insurance market, not by replacing it with a system designed by politically appointed so-called “experts.”

Ed Feulner is president of The Heritage Foundation.

Pro-Con: Should Congress expand health insurance to cover all children?

Comments: This article points out that things are not as simple as many politicians or the media members makes it out to be. In California, we have Medi-Cal and the Healthy Families plans so why are there uninsured children? Also would the proposed changes truly help the people that currently not insured?

Even before the impact of the current recession, the last government measurement in 2007 found that nearly 9 million American children are uninsured.

Last year the Democratic Congress passed, and President Bush vetoed, a major expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program that would have covered 3.8 million of these children by 2012 for about 1 percent of the cost of the recent government financial rescue plan. Since that time, the need has grown as 1.2 million additional Americans have lost their jobs.

It is critical that the federal government provide additional assistance to struggling families and states. We shouldn’t make any family have to choose between basic expenses and health care coverage for their kids.
- Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, D-N.Y.

The new Congress is poised to act on President-elect Barack Obama’s campaign promise to provide universal coverage for children. That would be a mistake. When a “free” government plan is offered, it’s nearly impossible to resist. Poorer children would be left behind as states focus on enrolling higher-income kids.

Expanding the program would “crowd out” the private insurance many higher-income kids already have. Putting many millions of children on a government program will quickly lead to restrictions on access to care. Lower- and moderate-income uninsured families, not just children, need help in purchasing policies, and that help could be provided through refundable tax credits.
- Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute

By Phillip Brownlee

Disability A Valuable Employee Benefit

Most large employers understand the value of providing disability insurance as a benefit option to their employees, whereas many small to medium employers, as well as their employees, have a low awareness of the need for disability insurance. If you are interested in attracting and retaining the highest quality employees for your organization, these are some of the reasons you should be offering disability insurance as part of your total benefit package.

Why disability insurance? Generally for most employees, their income is vital to their quality of life. Yet many employees put it at risk every day because they lack the disability insurance coverage necessary to protect it.

In fact, a 2007 CareerBuilder.com survey found that 4 out of 10 U.S. employees “always” or “often” live paycheck to paycheck. The Council for Disability Awareness, Portland, Maine, has amassed a collection of similarly disturbing statistics, including the fact that, in a typical year, disability causes about half of U.S. mortgage foreclosures.

Here are a few things that you should consider when evaluating the need for disability insurance:

• How do your employees plan to make their mortgage payments or pay for critical necessities such as electricity, fuel, food and health care if they become disabled and do not have disability insurance?
• Do they understand the importance of protecting their income streams?
• Do they understand the gaps in state disability insurance, workers’ compensation and Social Security coverage? Note that the largest gap affects non-occupational short-term disabilities.

For these reasons, voluntary disability insurance (employee-funded, no cost to employer) is a popular worksite benefit. In fact, a well-executed enrollment of employees with no prior disability coverage can easily achieve 30% to 50% participation. In order to make disability insurance a valued benefit, persuading employees to participate is not easy, requires a thoughtful strategy, a supportive employer, and proper communication.

For voluntary disability insurance to be a valued employee benefit, the small to medium employer must offer it like the larger employers. A successful enrollment requires a captive audience. Participation levels are directly linked to quality products, access to employees, and the expertise of the enrollment team.

The efficient way to reach employees is through a mandatory, employer-sponsored group meeting followed by one-on-one meetings to address individual needs. If a disability benefit is presented as a serious and valuable one, employees will treat it as such.

Left uneducated, employees will not understand the value of disability insurance and will likely be unwilling to opt for it. But if you are looking for a way to increase your benefit package without increasing your cost, voluntary disability insurance can be an important part of your program.

Ray Ward is a principal at Legacy Benefits & Insurance Services. He specializes in helping small to medium sized businesses create comprehensive and cost efficient benefit packages. You can contact Ray at RayWard@YourLegacyBenefits.com or by calling 916-677-2130 ext.101.

Health Savings Accounts can benefit employers and employees

By Craig Vaughn Tuesday, December 2, 2008 2:58 PM CST - Like many people, maybe you’ve read and heard about health savings accounts, but may still be asking: What exactly are they?

In a nutshell, they are an alternative to traditional health insurance plans that can offer certain tax advantages and the potential for added control over health care dollars and expenses. With a health savings account you can pay for current medical expenses, and save for future qualified and retiree health expenses, all on a tax-free basis.

There can be certain advantages to both employers and employees to having an HSA, but they should not be considered to be a one-size-fits-all solution. What may work well for one employer may not necessarily be the best benefit solution for the next.

To open an HSA, an eligible person must first be covered by a qualified high deductible health plan. The two are designed to work together, with one providing the underlying health insurance plan while the other is an account where you can accumulate money for future qualified expenses. I realize some people can be confused by the technical jargon at first, but hopefully after some further explanation, the concept will start to become clear. Rather than traditional co-payments which many people are familiar with, under an HDHP most covered medical services will track towards a person’s deductible, which is typically higher than most traditional plans. A person can then use pre-tax dollars accumulated in their HSA account to pay for those qualified medical expenses.

Some of the benefits to employers who offer HSAs can include:

■ Potential for greater premiums savings offered by an HDHP versus a more traditional plan with co-payments.

■ Flexibility. You can choose whether or not you would like to contribute to employee accounts, and how much you would like to contribute, subject to IRS limits.

■ Enhancing your overall benefits plan by offering attractive options that help attract and retain good employees.

Employees also can benefit from an HSA by:

■ Paying less for insurance premiums with an HDHP, and using the savings to help fund a health savings account.

■ Tax savings — pre-tax contributions, tax-free interest earnings and tax-free withdrawals when used for qualified medical expenses.

■ Ownership. You own the HSA, and it is yours to keep even when you change jobs or retire.

■ Unused balances and interest are carried over, without limit, from year to year.

As I mentioned earlier, the HDHP features a deductible that is typically higher than most traditional health insurance plans. Starting in 2009, the minimum deductibles are $1,150 for single and $2,300 for family coverage. Except for preventive care, you must meet the annual deductible before the plan begins to pay benefits. Many plans today cover many preventive services up front at 100 percent with no deductible, which is another attractive feature of these plans.

The IRS also puts a limit on the out-of-pocket maximum a plan can have, which in 2009 is $5,800 for single and $11,600 for family coverage.

The IRS has also raised the amount that can be contributed to an HSA account starting in 2009. For single people the contribution limit is $3,000, and for a family the limit is $5,950. In addition, there are catch-up provisions for people 55 and over, of an extra $1,000 per year.

As you can see, there are potential benefits of health savings accounts and high-deductible health plans, but as I mentioned, they may not be the right fit for every workplace and every employee. Discussing these and other options with an experienced and trusted benefits professional can be a good first step in determining if these options are right for you.

Craig Vaughn is director of sales for David Benefit Consulting, a division of David Insurance Agency