actually it probably would be. but as this will likely lead to a higher tax burden they are against it.
companies who fund their own insurance look to medical insurance providers (blue cross, UHC) and PBMs (express scripts) to help find ways to cut costs on health care as the money comes from their own budget. this spend is offset by employee’s who pay premiums, co-insurances and deductibles. they also put measures in place to control spending such as prior authorizations and formularies (we’ll cover ‘x’ as opposed to ‘y’ because x is cheaper). they look to these insurance companies for guidance along those lines, but ultimately the decision falls on the employer.
is you’re copay 40% of the cost of drug? that’s your employers decision that the PBM facilitates. conversely, is your copay only ever $5? well, that’s your employer who has a more “employee focused” attitude and money to spare and the very same PBM from the previous example may be facilitating this.
companies already have a form of socialist healthcare. employee A may be paying their premiums and never see’s a doctor or fills medication, but those premiums are not used for that employee. they offset the costs of other employees who pay the same premiums, but have medications and procedures that far exceed their copay limits. a drug may only cost a patient $10 copay based on how their insurance plan (dictated by the employer) covers it, but the actual cost of the drug can be far higher. sometimes thousands of dollars higher.
personally, i am all for M4A and i work in the industry. if it means my work becomes obsolete, so be it. at least i wont have to worry about getting sick.
Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com