Is an employer mandate or “play-or-pay” approach necessary?
Insurance coverage through employers has been steadily eroding in recent years. Five million employees lost coverage from 2000 to 2005, as the proportion of businesses offering it fell from 69 percent to 60 percent.16 The goal of an employer mandate is to reduce “crowd-out,” the further shifting of children out of employer-based health plans into government-sponsored plans, or at least to maintain an employer contribution through payment when coverage is not offered. An employer mandate would require employers to provide a specified level of family coverage or a defined amount of money to be used to purchase a child or family plan. A variation on the employer mandate is called “play” (provide coverage) or “pay” (pay an assessment when you don’t). Advocates for an employer mandate say that it is more equitable than the status quo because it levels the business playing field. Businesses that now provide some level of family coverage complain that they are at a financial disadvantage with
