Stories like this make clear that advocates of state fair share plans who like to point to the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act as a shining exemplar of what could be accomplished if only ERISA preemption would go away are barking up the wrong tree. Rather, the article, with its discussion of spiraling costs to
Health Insurance
And Still Another View on Preemption and the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act
By Stephen Rosenberg on
I’ve noted in the past that the problem with state health care reform acts mandating health insurance is that they don’t tackle the issue that is deterring employers from providing broader health insurance benefits, namely the ever increasing and rapidly escalating cost of health insurance. In response, Massachusetts lawyer David Harlow argues on his blog…
Someone Else’s Thoughts On Preemption and the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act
By Stephen Rosenberg on
People with thin skins – or who can’t laugh at themselves – shouldn’t write blogs. I got a good chuckle out of this over my morning coffee this morning.
The Lessons of the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act’s $400 Million Shortfall
By Stephen Rosenberg on
There’s a lot to be said about the preemption issues raised by state health insurance mandates and the assumptions that underlie the beliefs of those who argue that ERISA preemption should not be allowed to prevent states from experimenting with acts intended to remedy the problem of the uninsured. Articles like this one here,…
The Ninth Circuit on the San Francisco Health Insurance Mandate Ordinance
By Stephen Rosenberg on
Posted in Health Insurance, Preemption
Workplace Prof has the story here of a three judge panel out of the Ninth Circuit staying the district court ruling that the San Francisco ordinance mandating the provision of health insurance by employers was preempted, and provides a link to the ruling. I second the surprise he describes in his post over the…
ERISA Preempts Another One: Striking Down the San Francisco Ordinance
By Stephen Rosenberg on
Posted in Health Insurance, Preemption
Well, I have talked before about dog bites man stories, and here’s another one. The United States District Court for the District of Northern California has now ruled that San Francisco’s ordinance requiring certain health care expenditures by employers was preempted by ERISA. The Workplace Prof sums up the ruling here, although he is wrong…
California, Fair Share Acts and Preemption: Have We Learned Anything At All?
By Stephen Rosenberg on
I’ve got a few things lined up this week to talk about, running from long term disability benefits litigation to avoiding ERISA litigation to subprime mortgages, but first I am going to veer off of my planned course to pass along and comment on a pair of interesting posts that showed up in my in-box…
State Mandates and Health Insurance Pricing
By Stephen Rosenberg on
Well now, this morning I came across this interesting post here, on the State Policy Blog, comparing health insurance pricing in one semi-unregulated state insurance market (Colorado) and in a state, Massachusetts, with a state mandate requiring health insurance. As you can see from the post, the numbers show pricing is significantly higher…
High Health Care Costs and the Impact on Fair Share Acts
By Stephen Rosenberg on
Okay, I mentioned on Friday that I had come across some other interesting blogs and sites over the last few weeks that I wanted to pass along, and that I would do so over the next few days. I jumped off track on doing that right off the bat with this morning’s post on insurance…
Pay or Play Acts: There’s No Free Lunch
By Stephen Rosenberg on
I have written before that the underlying structural problem with fair share and similar acts, like the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act, that seek to mandate the provision of health insurance by employers is twofold: first, they play at the margins of a problem that is fundamentally about the base economics of health care…