As an Iowa-raised and -educated physician, currently taking time off from clinical practice to obtain a masters in public health, analyzing health news has become part of my new routine. In Tony Leys’ article “Iowa employers’ health insurance costs jump 7.7 percent” [Sept. 8], I found David Lind’s thoughts about the practices of employers with fewer than 50 people and their methods for providing health insurance worth expanding on.
Lind stated that “Because of a quirk in the law, some workers could be better off if their small employers drop coverage.” This is because employees would be eligible to participate in the health exchanges to purchase health insurance, which might be beneficial for both the employee and employer. The employee might be able to select from a wider range of health insurance options than what their employer’s plan provides, and additionally the plan wouldn’t be strictly tied to continued employment with that small business. A small employer who now offers health insurance could be relieved of the bureaucratic burden of dealing with health insurance plans and could offer proportionally higher salaries to employees who would be free to seek their health insurance on the exchange. So then, why aren’t they using this option?
I think that there is much that could be done to help Iowans benefit from the new health exchange marketplaces. From a policy perspective, equalizing the tax incentives on employer-provided health insurance with those purchased on the exchanges could encourage higher utilization; and from a practice perspective, offering strong technical support and less red tape for both employees and employers to help them navigate this new process might increase usage of this flexible and powerful way to get people the coverage they want.
Date: September 17, 2015