The articles last week on the proposal by outgoing Governor Tim Kaine to expand health care benefits of state employees didn’t tell the whole story. Now that we have the proposed language for the changes, hopefully some of the commentors will rethink their positions. Let’s start at the beginning.
In 2007, then Attorney General Bob McDonnell issued an opinion (pdf) on the extension of UVA gym memberships McDonnell concluded:
It is my opinion that the University of Virginia is authorized to provide a recreational gym membership to an adult who is not a spouse and who lives in the household of the employee or student.
In footnote 9, McDonnell pointed out that expanding the eligibility based on the personal relationship of the employee or student and the adult coresident may violate the Constitution. It is because of this opinion that the issue on expanding state health care benefits arose. The proposed changes, which have been in the making for over a year, have been carefully crafted to fall within the parameters that McDonnell laid out. It is now winding its way through the Administrative Procedures Act regulatory process.
The key provisions are:
- Employees would have to pay 100% of the cost of the other qualified adult (OQA) premiums for coverage. (This is in contrast to current state benefits that pay over 80% of the cost of premiums for employees, spouses and covered dependents.)
- Only one adult in a household could be covered. If a spouse is already covered, you cannot add an OQA.
- To qualify, the adult would have to be at least 19 years old and have lived in the employee’s household continuously for 12 months.
- Renters, boarders, tenants and employees of anyone who lives in the household would be excluded from coverage.
There is also a provision to include a dependent, unmarried adult child who resides with the employee.
A few facts:
- Sixteen state governments, including Alaska, and 152 city and county governments offer similar benefits. In our region, there are nine cities and counties in Maryland and five in North Carolina.
- 308 colleges and universities offer similar benefits, including Hollins, Sweet Briar and Washington & Lee – all private universities – in Virginia. Other schools on the list include Brown, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Georgetown and the Universities of Alabama, Florida, amd Michigan.
- 66% of the Virginia’s 50 largest employers offer such benefits, including Newport News Shipbuilding, Lowes, Dominion Power and Capital One Bank.
- Eight of the nine Fortune 500 companies in Virginia offers similar benefits.
It seems to me that this “expansion” will really be quite small, as few people will be in a position to take advantage of it. However, since it is virtually cost-free, I see no downside to it. And even the conservative Richmond Times-Dispatch supports the proposal.
I will be voicing my support of the proposal and urge you to do the same. The comment period is open until December 23.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Since the entire cost will be paid for by the employee, my only beef with the proposed legislation is “key provision #2.” Why only one, if there is no cost to the State? Twice now, I have been in the situation that a relative has been living with me without insurance. They were unemployed, and had to be on Medicaid anyway.
And, seriously, what of polygamous situations? Everyone knows this is about same-sex relationships (hence the existence of “key provision #2”), so if you want to address that discrimination, why continue discrimination against polygamous relationships?