“Mini-Med” hearing misses point

1 Comment | This entry was posted in Health Care, Public Policy

The Senate Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee will hold a hearing this Wednesday on limited benefit coverage, sometimes also known as “mini-med” coverage. These benefits – most often seen in industries with low profit margins and with lower income workers – have been in the news lately because of certain problems created by the new health law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) of 2010.

There are many problems with PPACA – none the least of which is the employer mandate – but the limited benefit coverage has been one of first threatened casualties of the law. NRF has been working closely with the Obama Administration to protect this coverage – and have only positive things to say about their efforts so far. The Obama Administration created a fair process for waivers from restrictions on annual benefit limits and set forward a methodology to help these plans meet new medical loss ratio (MLR) standards in 2011. We appreciate the Administration’s help on this coverage.

So, what will we hear from the Administration during the hearing? Apparently they have not even been invited to testify! Instead, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), chairman of the committee, will seek to drive this coverage out of the marketplace, despite the Administration’s best efforts to protect it.

1.4 million Americans stand to lose their coverage if Sen. Rockefeller gets his way and applies the full MLR standards to limited benefit coverage. There is not an affordable substitute in the insurance market today nor can the hard-pressed state Medicaid rolls take on these newly uninsured Americans. They will be forced to wait for new coverage options available under PPACA in 2014.

We hope the Senate Commerce Committee will take a kinder look at limited benefit coverage tomorrow … and join NRF and the Obama Administration in safeguarding coverage. We have shared these sentiments with the committee in a letter.

Posted in: Health Care | Public Policy and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One Comment

  1. Posted November 30, 2010 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

    Repeat after me: “It’s all about the consumer stupid!!” That’s what we forgot in MA, & that’s why our law is now unaffordable for the little guy. If gov’t is going to say you must have coverage, they must leave the decisions to the payers (aka: the consumer) as to what coverages they want, what coverages they need, and what coverages they can afford. Otherwise this law cannot stand politically, economically or legally. Just saying…

Post a Comment

  • Posting Policy

    NRF welcomes intelligent discussion and debate from our community. We do insist that all comments must be expressed in a mature and civil tone of voice. Individuals posting rude or otherwise inappropriate material will lose their access to the discussion.

    Thank you,

    Note: While anonymous comments are welcome, they are also moderated and may not be posted immediately. If you don't see your comment, please be patient, as it will be reviewed and posted soon if appropriate. Please do not post your comment a second time. Thank you.

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>