Editor’s note: At the request of a number of OOIDA members, we are publishing a transcript of my conversation with Melissa regarding the health care reform debate currently under way in Congress.

A few quick notes: We initially covered the health care reform topic in response to member requests – truckers who wanted to know some specifics about how the bill could affect small businesses. Essentially, it was same situation that has led us to offer you this transcript.

We should make clear at this time, that this information was up-to-date as of the day it aired on Land Line Now. However, as Melissa notes in our conversation below, this bill is changing as we speak, and the final version has yet to be written.

In fact, new information is already available regarding some of the specific areas Melissa discussed, such as the effect on small businesses, and amendments to the Senate version are being made … and rejected.

That being said, per member requests, here is my conversation with Melissa Theriault Rohan from Nov. 25, 2009.

MARK REDDIG: Land Line Now thanks for joining us today.

There’s a bill out there that could have a huge impact on every trucking business. And it’s one that we haven’t covered much.

It’s the health care bill – or more precisely bills, since there are at least two versions still out there.

OOIDA hasn’t taken an official stand on this, and we haven’t covered it much on the show because this is not a trucking- or transportation-specific measure.

But because any business small or large could see their operations change under this plan, we think we really need to provide you with some insight into what’s happening.

Here to discuss what you need to know is Melissa Theriault Rohan of OOIDA Washington, DC, office. Melissa how are you doing?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: I’m doing real well; thanks for having me on.

MARK REDDIG: Well, glad to have you here. Let’s start with going over what the House bill calls for that truckers need to know. And in this case, I want to start with, what are the basics as far as how this applies to individuals, and how it would affect individual people?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: If you do not have an insurance provided by an employer, then you would be required as an individual to purchase insurance or pay a penalty of 2.5 percent of your income, up to the cost of the average national plan under the exchange.

MARK REDDIG: Now you mention exchange; what do we mean by the exchange?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: The administration would be required to establish as part of the administration an insurance marketplace that they’re calling the exchange. And this is where people without access to affordable coverage through an employer could purchase comprehensive plans. Basically this is the public option.

MARK REDDIG: Now through the exchanges, wouldn’t you also be able to purchase other private plans that would be thrown into the exchange

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: Yes, at this point, with the House version, that is true.

MARK REDDIG: Now ah what about folks that don’t really make enough to actually afford to buy insurance at the prices that it’s offered at today. Is there some provision in there to help them out or to deal with that?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: There are a couple of things. First off, they would be expanding the Medicaid program under the House version to 150 percent of the federal poverty level which is $33,000 for a family of four.

So if your family or if you made $33,000 or less, then you would be eligible for the Medicaid program, and it would kick in for you. Now, if you make above that $33,000 for a family of four up to $88,000, then if you fall within range again, $33,000 to $88,000, you would be able to have subsidies available to your households for the programs on the exchange.

MARK REDDIG: Now that’s individuals, but obviously there’s also a lot that is going to apply to employers here in the House plan, and, again, we’re talking about the version of the health care bill that currently in the U.S. House. So let’s start with the general stuff about employers – not stuff that would apply to employers off any particular size, but all of them. What are the common requirements that employers would face under the House version of health care?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: Well, they’re calling this the pay or play provision. So if you hear it in the news, this is what we’re talking about. Basically, small businesses that are below a payroll of $500,000 would be exempt from this provision. So anything, any small, any small business or any business that’s above that $500,000 threshold would be required to offer health benefit coverage to employees.

And then there’s another provision. So, if you’re a small business owner and your payroll is between $500,000 to $750,000, you would pay lower penalties than a larger business, if you did not provide health coverage. So there’s a lot of different caveats to this.

Also, if you are a business with fewer than 25 employees, average wages of $40,000, then you could get tax credits that could amount to as much as 50 percent of premiums. So this is … pretty good for small businesses, especially for the smallest of small businesses. Um, it really wouldn’t cost a small business much, if it did at all.

In an independent study that both Republicans and Democrats are using, basically, if you’re a firm that’s fewer than 10 workers, and currently provide health care benefits, the cost per worker would actually drop by $829 per worker.

Uh, now, if … the burden actually lies if you have a firm that’s 25 to 100 employees, because, according to this study, those small businesses, or those businesses, would see costs rise an estimated $412 per worker for a year.

MARK REDDIG: And of course, these are averages in a study, these wouldn’t apply exactly to every business in those size categories.

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: Correct – this is based on a study that is pretty highly regarded by everybody that’s covering this health care bill.

MARK REDDIG: And, and just for clarification here, one of the things we have as a problem, all of us out here, not only in the business you and I engage in, but also every member of the public is, both sides politically are spinning this their own way. Is this a non-partisan group or a partisan group that did this study?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: This is a non-partisan group. It’s, um, called Lewin Group, it’s a subsidiary of United Health Group, and they conduct analysis of health care policy and operate independently of insurance carriers. It’s completely a non-partisan, and is a 3^rd party. They are not beholden, really to anybody, and they are just providing these studies. And, like I said, it is being quoted and used by numerous folks.

MARK REDDIG: Now, one of the things that we’ve seen with health care up till now is big businesses had an advantage because they had this huge pool of employees that they could use to bargain for rates. Small companies just didn’t have that. And for years, there’s been a lot of barriers to small companies gathering together in order to try and purchase that pooled coverage as a unit. Um, is there anything in the law to fix that particular problem in terms of buying insurance for small companies?

Both the House and Senate, and the administration are looking to create a large pool, and that’s why they’re requiring everybody to get on to … into an insurance program, whether it being the public or a private option, because they want these larger pools.

Now as an individual, you know, if you were currently on your own going to get insurance, you wouldn’t be able to benefit from a pool. Or if you had a small business, and you were trying to get, um, insurance for your employees, you also, again, would not be able to benefit from the pool – whereas large companies are able to provide health benefits to their employees at such a low cost because they do have these pooling mechanisms.

So, both the administration and the House and the Senate are all trying to create these pools to reduce the risk.

MARK REDDIG: Now, we’ve talked so far about the version in the U.S. House, and we have just a couple of minutes left. Can you give us some differences – what are some of the key points where the Senate version differs from the House version?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: The Senate version isn’t finished yet, um, and we don’t know when it will be. So this can change before it’s passed. But currently, as it stands right now, it creates a public option, but it allows states that don’t want to participate to opt out. And that’s huge. Whereas the House version, there would be this public option.

Also, the penalties for individuals on the Senate version starts at $95 in 2014, but for the individual it would rise to $750 by 2016, or a max of $2,200 per family. So I think that’s an important difference there.

Also, there is a difference as far as how they treat small businesses. In the Senate version, it talks to … about a small business not in the terms of payroll, but in terms of number of employees. So the, um, threshold in the Senate bill is 50 employees. And then the penalty to an employer would be $750 per person on their payroll. Now, there are, uh, more stipulations to that, but that’s the basic information there.

MARK REDDIG: And when we say penalty, we’re talking about if firm larger than 50 people doesn’t …

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: Correct.

MARK REDDIG: … buy their employees insurance.

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: The Medicaid, like I mentioned before, would be expanded, but it’s slightly lower on the House bill. Theirs would be $29,000 for a family of four. But other than that, everything’s pretty much looks similar to the House version – when we’re talking about small businesses or the individual.

MARK REDDIG: Well, Melissa, thank you very much for the information, I know it’ll help people out a lot.

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: I hope so.

MARK REDDIG: Thanks for joining us. We’ve been talking Melissa Theriault Rohan of OOIDA’s Washington, DC, office.