One big issue in the health reform debate is whether it would be wise to remove employers from the central role in buying insurance they've played for better than a half century.
A lot of people find that idea attractive for a variety of reasons. Employers have lost confidence that they can tame the system and negotiate good deals for their workers. They're less interested in recruiting career employees who will spend a lifetime with a single firm and thus less attracted by benefits that cement such relationships.
Conservatives say employer-sponsored plans have shielded the covered from the real costs involved, discouraged shopping and made them insensitive to inflation. Liberals say today's system is based on a tax break that's particularly advantageous to the rich.
These are things worth discussing. But there's also an allegation that today's system has led to massive job lock that could be keeping more than three-quarters of those with employer-linked insurance in jobs they'd prefer to leave. Basically, this suggests that they'd like to become entrepreneurs and take risks that would create a more vibrant American economy.
So today's policy discourages labor mobility, thereby undermining our international competitiveness in a world where other industrialized countries provide needed healthcare to all irrespective of where - or whether - they work.
A recent Reuters story carries this article to the preposterous level by citing unnamed studies claiming that 20-50% of workers are unhappily tethered to their jobs because they're reluctant to abandon their health insurance (notwithstanding the fact that they could retain it for more than a year after leaving the job by simply paying the full premium under the COBRA program).
Back in 2007, before the economy went south, the Census Bureau estimated that more than 145 million Americans were working. That means that somewhere between 29 and 72 million Americans were champing to head for greener economic pastures. Believe that?
Before you agree, wait, because there's more. Government data (http://www.ahrq.gov/news/nn/nn080605.htm ) from a few years ago shows that 64% of those employed by large employers were getting insurance because of their job link (the number at smaller firms must be even lower because firms employing fewer than 50 people are less likely to even offer insurance).
Marrying these figures via the marvels of math leads to the conclusion that most workers may be victims of job lock -- and that somewhere between 31%-78% -- are so disadvantaged.
If you believe that, we're probably sitting on an explosion of entrepreneurship that could solve our economic problems in a thrice. Sadly, I don't believe it. And I suspect - or at least hope--that not too many others do either.
This is just another parochial effort to divert our focus from the tough questions we confront. A case can be made for encouraging employers to exit the health benefits business, but these improbable studies add more heat than light to the debate.
