WASHINGTON — Some Minnesotans with employer-provided health insurance could find themselves with more out-of-pocket costs and coverage restrictions under the Republican health care bill, health policy analysts say.
Waivers that free individual states from certain federal coverage requirements are key to the GOP plan that passed the House of Representatives Thursday and now goes to the U.S. Senate. Put in place to win conservatives' votes, those waivers are supposed to lower the cost of health insurance in the individual market.
But an analyst from the Brookings Institution says large employer plans, which make up 85 percent of the nation's health insurance market, could choose to restrict coverage based on those waivers. That could affect basic benefits that are now guaranteed under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Workers also could be affected by changes in the definition of what is considered "essential" health coverage, said Matthew Fiedler, a fellow in the Center for Health Policy at Brookings, a Washington think tank.
Large employer insurance plans may adopt the definition of essential benefits of any state, Fiedler said, regardless of where their employees work. States that limit coverage could become the model for companies that want to save on insurance.
"That approach has very big implications," Fiedler told the Star Tribune.
Peter Nelson, a senior policy fellow at Minnesota's Center of the American Experiment, a conservative public policy advocacy group, counters that the waiver program would give states "more flexibility." Nelson said those with preexisting conditions who cannot afford traditional coverage would find it in federally subsidized high-risk insurance pools under the GOP bill.
"I really don't see this negatively affecting that many employees," he said.