GovernmentExecutive.com

The House Oversight and Government Reform Federal Workforce Subcommittee passed a bill this week increasing the maximum age under which children of federal employee can qualify for dependent coverage through the government's health benefits program.

The measure, which raises the maximum age of dependents eligible for the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan from 22 to 25, passed by unanimous voice vote after a hearing in which representatives of federal employees' unions urged its passage.

The committee also by unanimous voice vote passed a substitute amendment offered by House Oversight and Government Reform Federal Workforce Subcommittee Chairman Danny Davis, D-Ill., intended to comply with House pay-as-you go rules. Davis' amendment would give children of employees already covered through the program, the option to voluntarily enroll in a new plan. Health providers would then bid to cover individual enrollees.

That step would ensure "the cost would be less than what is currently available to this age group in the individual market," Davis said.

Davis and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-D.C., whose district includes many federal employees, expressed concern the bill could be derailed if the Congressional Budget Office scores it unfavorably. The Office of Personnel Management covering about 245,000 dependents now in the program for an extra three years would cost about $200 million.

Subcommittee members disputed that estimate, arguing that increasing the number of young people in the program would reduce premiums. Norton suggested OPM should hire an independent company with insurance experience to estimate the bill's cost.

"The wisdom of the bill itself cannot be doubted," she said, arguing that it would help cut the number of young adults without health insurance.

COMMENTS

• JT: How do you explain the large number of Canadians seeking health care in American hospitals if socialized medicine is so great? There are many stories in the media about how specialized care is unavailable in Canada, or requires waiting months or years. High risk Canadian mothers are flocking to U.S. hospitals for childbirth, because beds aren't available in their country. Other Canadians are coming here for surgery they can't wait for in Canada. The same is true in England and other Western countries with socialized medicine, which is not the panacea many claim it to be. Bob Posted May 7, 2008 10:54 AM
• Only someone in gov't doesn't understand counting 4 is more than 3 8 is less than 9. Everyone covered has a cost associated so with the increase coverage to 25 the insurance companies will demand a higher premium and someone has to pay it. I prefer it be you and not me dan m ketter Posted May 6, 2008 10:33 PM
• CAM has presented a position many of you do not have a complete focus upon...I do pay a family plan today. Dropping my 22 year old saved the tax payer nothing. If we are already paying the family 'approved' plan what benefit does the federal employee or tax payer gain? I simply pay more for health insurance for my 22yr old. Kent Chadrick Posted May 5, 2008 8:51 PM