Key element of SF's landmark health insurance law struck down

[Newsjock]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

A federal judge today overturned a central feature of San Francisco's ground-breaking health insurance law, which would require employers to help pay for coverage of the city's 82,000 uninsured adult residents.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White described San Francisco's goal as "laudable" but said its ordinance - the first of its kind in the nation, and a potential model for other California cities and the state - conflicted with a 1974 federal law that prohibits state and local governments from regulating employees' benefits.

The ruling, if it stands, will require the city to scale back plans to extend health coverage to all uninsured residents who aren't already covered by the Medi-Cal program for the poor or by Medicare for the elderly. Tangerine Brigham, director of the city's health benefits program, said Wednesday that if the employer fee was struck down, city officials would limit enrollment to residents making no more than three times the federal poverty level, or about $32,000 a year for an individual.

White's ruling could impede other state and local efforts to cover the uninsured in the absence of a national law. A state health care bill endorsed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and approved by the Assembly would be partly funded by employer fees, subject to state voters' approval.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/26/BA5AU50F2.DTL&tsp=1

[sandnsea]

1. They how do they mandate auto insurance

I will never understand people who accept all kinds of mandates on individuals but nothing on business. Makes no sense.

[xchrom]

2. this isn't the last word on this.

and i'm guessing sacramento realizes the conflict with the 74 law.