Massachusetts’ health plan not a solution, union leaders say

Massachusetts’ new health care mandate, which forces uninsured workers to purchase health care coverage or face higher taxes and fines, is being hailed by its proponents as the answer to the health care coverage crisis. But unions and others say the plan simply absolves employers of their responsibilities and shifts the burden of health care costs onto workers.

The Massachusetts plan as a whole is “unconscionable” and “misguided,” said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney. “This legislation leaves middle-income families dangling without a safety net, jeopardizes families who currently have employer-sponsored health care, and gives employers a free ride.”

The Massachusetts law, the first of its kind, is designed to cover 95 percent of the state’s 550,000 uninsured individuals within three years by legally requiring that every person have health insurance coverage by July 1, 2007, or face a stiff income-tax penalty.

The legislation does nothing to address skyrocketing health care costs and puts the burden of payment on families who already are struggling, Sweeney said.

Under the legislation, individuals who don’t qualify for the state Medicaid program or for insurance through their jobs would be forced to buy low-cost private plans. The state will pay the entire premium for individuals and families who earn less than 100 percent of the poverty level?$9,800 for a single person and $20,000 for a family of four?and will subsidize premiums for those who earn between 100 and 300 percent of the federal poverty level. Uninsured residents with incomes greater than 300 percent of the poverty level will be on their own to pay the full cost.

A typical family in which the husband and wife each earn a little more than $30,000 and who have two children, would be forced to purchase health care, but would not be qualified for any help even if their employer does not offer any coverage or they can’t afford their share of the premium, he said. With the average employer-sponsored insurance premium costing more than $4,000 a year for single workers and close to $11,000 a year for working families, Massachusetts’ new requirement will bankrupt many middle-class families, the AFL-CIO said.

Unions support health care reforms that require employers to live up to their responsibilities and provide health care to their employees, Sweeney said. Massachusetts’ own Sen. Kennedy has proposed legislation to require employers of more than 50 workers to provide employees with health insurance; and in January of this year, Maryland passed legislation requiring large employers, such as Wal-Mart, to insure their workers.

“States are passing groundbreaking and precedent-setting laws. But we hope this (Massachusetts law) is one precedent no other state will follow,” Sweeney said.

This article is adapted from the AFL-CIO Now website, http://blog.aflcio.org/

Related article
Commentary: Funny thing happened on the way to health care reform