Preservation
of Employer-Financed Health Care
Introduction
This critique has three purposes:
1.
Demonstrate that
employer-financed health care is under assault.
2.
Show why self-funding
may assist in the preservation of employer-financed health care.
3.
Suggest a number of
changes to self-funding which will make it more helpful and acceptable to
employer-financed health care.
Employer-Financed Health
Care Under Assault
In many ways, employer-financed health care is being challenged. The primary adversaries to the present
system are as follows:
·
Large federal government
advocates
·
Globalists and
internationalists with their economic agendas
·
A small percentage of
trial lawyers
·
A few insurers that
would gain market-share with supplemental-type benefit packages
·
Numerous consumer
advocate groups who find fault with the present system.
Politically speaking, a sizeable percent of the voters could be
expected to favor a single-payer system over present employer-financed system
of health care.
Why Self-Funding Can Help Preserve
the Present System
Self-funding gives the plan sponsor and all of the vendors the degrees
of freedom to correct the numerous identified imperfections in the present
system with the greatest speed and certainty of success. Of enormous importance are the following
reasons why self-funding may help preserve the present system:
·
ERISA preemption
advantage
·
Not being burdened with
centuries of insurance case law
·
Division of labor
(specialization) designed to maximize efficiency and harmony among the employer
and vendors (community-based plan administration, e.g.)
·
Not being under the
dominion of fifty state insurance departments.
Correcting Present
Imperfections
This portion of the critique is in two parts:
1.
An enumeration and brief
discussion of all of the features of our present system which the writer finds
to be confusing, alarming, correctable, objectionable, questionable, etc. See attachment A.
2.
The presentation and
detailed discussion of all of the ways by which self-funding may be modified so
as to be the most effective funding vehicle for employer-sponsored plans. Self-funding modifications which are
suggested are as follows (in no significant order):
·
Increased role of risk
management
·
Suggested changes to
stop-loss
·
Micro-managed plan
document
·
New self-funded risks
(LTD, death, supplemental coverage, e.g.)
·
Increased role of the
MGU
·
Role of defined
contribution plan
·
Requisite attitude
changes
·
Miscellaneous charges
Editorial Comment
The writer finds in all matters and at all times the employer and vendors
to be equally virtuous and properly following their own business plan. The writer is biased towards self-funding
(akin to home-ownership), but quickly acknowledges that the fully insured
option (as apartment renting) must be always an option (and very often the best
option) for the employer.