I can get a bit frustrated when I see liberal sentiments voting down something like this:
House Bill 2287 would have allowed small employers who don’t currently offer a group health plan to their workers to establish a so-called Health Reimbursement Arrangement or HRA so that the employer could help pay the premiums of workers with individual health plans.
The measure had the backing of the National Federation of Independent Business-Kansas and the Wichita Independent Business Association.
State insurance department officials said they worried the bill could undermine the small-group market by encouraging workers and employers to favor individual health plans.
Ok, the problem is that a large portion of the uninsured population works for small businesses or low-wage businesses that cannot practically afford group coverage that is the base of our health insurance system. So it is proposed that we find other ways to help small businesses help people (who are already exposed to the vagaries of the individual market) afford their non-group coverage.
The problem is, this may have the unintended consequence of sounding like a cheaper idea to other similar companies (though worse for the employee), so liberals, fearing this, decide to keep the one group of poor individuals marginally worse off in order to allow the other group to remain marginally better off. If I am having to choose between these two options, I am going to tend to opt for the one that is less restrictive governmental policy and pass this bill, but because it is not cost free, the problematic status quo is maintained.
Of course, this does not replace more substantial actions such as individual market reform or small business insurance subsidies that could be even better, but passing this legislation would not preclude those other reforms as they are largely unrelated, it would just be an easy way to make things a little easier in the meantime.
