U.S. Health System Should Not Rely on Employer-Sponsored Coverage, Opinion Piece States

In the current U.S. employment market, "where most individuals change employers many times over a lifetime," the "reliance on employers" to provide health care coverage "makes little sense economically," Peter Beilenson -- founder of Maryland's Health Care for All initiative and health officer for Howard County, Md. -- writes in a Baltimore Sun opinion piece. He states that employer-sponsored coverage is the "most problematic aspect of our current health care system."

According to Beilenson, employer-based coverage does not encourage companies to cover preventive care because it is likely employees will leave before the company will reap the benefits. In addition, he adds that the cost of health care coverage has risen "at far greater rates" than other sectors of the economy, which puts "greater and greater strain" on businesses, particularly small businesses. Beilenson continues that recent court decisions also will force businesses that offer health coverage to "change their practices to adequately cover the costs of retiree benefits as well."

Beilenson writes that the "biggest obstacle to eliminating reliance on employer-based coverage is not economical but political" because employers "tend to be more fearful of a new system than they are worried about the costs and headaches associated with the status quo." He adds, "Unfortunately, all of the major presidential candidates' [health care] proposals depend, in one form or another, on continuing" the employer-based coverage system.

Beilenson writes that a government-run, single-payer health system, "rather than many thousands of payers," is "[m]ore sensible" and could be funded "through a corporate and individual tax." He notes that some businesses "are starting to see the light" and advocating for universal health coverage because "they are spending up to 20% of their payrolls on health care, instead of investing those resources in product development or new processes."

He concludes that it is "in the best interest of American business to decouple the provision of health insurance from the workplace" so that "they will free themselves of unnecessary burdens, create a fairer playing field and become more competitive globally" (Beilenson, Baltimore Sun, 3/28).