Student health insurance coverage. Final rule

This final rule establishes requirements for student health insurance coverage under the Public Health Service (PHS) Act and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act). The final rule defines "student health insurance coverage" as a type of individual health insurance coverage, and specifies that certain PHS Act requirements are inapplicable to this type of individual health insurance coverage. This final rule also amends the medical loss ratio and annual limits requirements for student health insurance coverage under the PHS Act.     

Unmanaged care: towards moral fairness in health care coverage

Health insurers are generally guided by the principle of "actuarial fairness," according to which they distinguish among various risks on the basis of cost-related factors. Thus, insurers often limit or deny coverage for vision care, hearing aids, mental health care, and even AIDS treatment based on actuarial justifications. Furthermore, approximately forty-two million Americans have no health insurance at all, because most of these individuals cannot afford the cost of insurance. This Article argues that Americans have come to demand more than actuarial fairness from health insurers and are increasingly concerned by what I call "moral fairness." This is evidenced by the hundreds of laws that have been passed to constrain insurers' discretion with respect to particular coverage decisions. Legislative mandates are frequent, but seemingly haphazard, following no systematic methodology. This Article suggests an analytical framework that can be utilized to determine which interventions are appropriate and evaluates a variety of means by which moral fairness could be promoted in the arena of health care coverage.     

Employer health coverage for domestic partners--identifying the issues

Several well-known companies now offer employees the opportunity to provide health coverage to gay, lesbian, or opposite-sex domestic partners, and others are considering doing so. This article examines the practical, tax, and other legal issues that employers need to consider as they make decisions about this benefit. Issues include the criteria that employees and their domestic partners must meet in order for coverage to be available, the cost of coverage, and how coverage is taxed in different situations.     

Expanding health insurance coverage: who will pay?

Recent discussions on extending health insurance to the more than thirty million uninsured Americans have focused on two strategies: expanding the Medicaid program and mandating that employers sponsor coverage for their employees. This analysis, using a microsimulation model of the U.S. health care financing system, suggests that these two options would result in very different distributions of financial burden. Employer-sponsored coverage is financed in a highly regressive fashion, in contrast to the Medicaid program, which is proportional to income. Furthermore, the burden of paying for health care under Medicaid varies little among generations, whereas the cost of employer-sponsored care is lowest in households headed by persons over sixty-five years old. Low health status populations do not pay disproportionately higher taxes or premiums to finance either the Medicaid program or employer-sponsored coverage. Their incomes, however, are more effectively protected by Medicaid, because it offers more comprehensive benefits.     

Holding back the tide: policies to preserve and reconstruct health insurance coverage in Maryland

Over the past decade, state officials have pursued a variety of strategies to protect and expand health insurance coverage for their residents. This article examines the course of action in Maryland, where new initiatives were shaped around the state's unique hospital payment system and its reimbursement of uncompensated care, an evolving Medicaid and children's health program, and regulation of the small group health insurance market. Several important patterns emerge from the Maryland experience. First, even the most incremental initiatives--programs intended to aid a few thousand beneficiaries--bring into play the very issues that hamper comprehensive reforms: who is deserving of mutual aid and what is the proper role of government versus private entities in administering that aid. In Maryland, these issues generate conflict not only between Democrats and Republicans but also urban and rural interests. Second, all of the important reforms of the past decade were undertaken primarily in reaction to federal policy initiatives. Contrary to rhetoric lauding states as the "laboratories of democracy," the political impetus for reform and basic policy options emerge from interaction between federal and state debates. Third, even with budget surpluses and Democrats in control of the governorship and legislature, Maryland did not move aggressively toward universal health insurance. Now, with a much weaker economy and a new, Republican governor, the primary challenge will be to prevent further erosion of insurance coverage. The Maryland experience reiterates that each step toward greater health security, no matter how small, is a major technical and political challenge and that it will be difficult if not impossible to rely on states to secure coverage for all Americans in the foreseeable future.     

Continuation coverage requirements of group health plans--IRS. Notice of proposed rulemaking

This document contains proposed regulations that provide guidance under section 4980B of the Internal Revenue Code on certain changes made by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, and the Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 relating to the continuation coverage requirements applicable to group health plans. The regulations will generally affect sponsors of and participants in group health plans, and they provide plan sponsors and plan administrators with guidance necessary to comply with the law.     

Final regulations for health coverage portability for group health plans and group health insurance issuers under HIPAA Titles I & IV. Final regulation

This document contains final regulations governing portability requirements for group health plans and issuers of health insurance coverage offered in connection with a group health plan. The rules contained in this document implement changes made to the Internal Revenue Code, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, and the Public Health Service Act enacted as part of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.