Texas Insider Report: AUSTIN Texas The big story last night beyond Congress abrupt & pre-election adjournment centered around McDonalds consideration of dropping health coverage for its workers. It is ironic this story came on a day that 59 Senate Democrats voted against legislation that would have permitted individuals to keep their current plan as President Obama has repeatedly promised.
The Wall Street Journals article can be read here. Reuters has a separate story on the Journal piece here.
McDonalds consideration of dropping health coverage is based upon the fact that the limited benefit plans it currently offers will likely be unable to meet the minimum medical loss ratio requirement to pay 85 of premiums back in medical claims (due in part to high turnover among employees which raises administrative costs).
And its of course ironic that the story came on the same day 59 Senate Democrats voted against legislation that would have permitted individuals to keep their current plan as they were repeatedly promised 
by the President during the health reform debate.
But just as interesting is a paragraph suggesting that when it comes to employers dropping coverage McDonalds may be the canary in the coal mine:
Insurers say dozens of other employers could find themselves in the same situation as McDonalds. Aetna Inc. one of the largest sellers of mini-med plans provides the plans to Home Depot Inc. Disney Worldwide Services CVS Caremark Corp. Staples Inc. and Blockbuster Inc. among others according to an Aetna client list obtained by the Journal. Aetna also covers AmeriCorps teaching-program sponsors who are required by law to make health coverage available.
So not only could tens of thousands more private sector workers lose their health insurance coverage as a result of the new law and regulations AmeriCorps government-paid volunteers could lose their current plan as
well.
Some would argue as the article itself references that limited benefit plans could be better." But while limited benefit plans may not necessarily constitute comprehensive coverage its also clear that some coverage is better than no coverage at all.
And yet the medical loss ratio requirements may have the perverse effect of RAISING the number of uninsured between now and 2014.
