In Benefits Feds Trust

Comments on a story about Hillary Clinton’s health care proposal indicate that at least some federal employees are very protective of their benefits.

"Keep the Hildabeast away from my health care."

That's how Dean O. reacted to an Oct. 12 GovernmentExecutive.com story about how Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's proposal to open the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program to uninsured Americans might affect federal employees.

Dean's response might have been unusually vehement, but 73 percent of voters in an (admittedly unscientific) online poll and others submitting comments on the story shared his sentiments. They expressed concern that allowing other Americans to buy insurance through FEHBP would increase competition for doctors' attention and cause costs to rise -- and that opening the program would degrade the value of an important, and exclusively federal, benefit.

"To have to share the amount and quality of my health care in an already overburdened HMO is not appealing," Karen Polk wrote.

"You can forget about what it'll do to your premiums. You'll be in line getting little of the care promised by the plan," Bob Coleman stated.

These concerns might be allayed as the campaign progresses, and Clinton outlines more details of how her health care plan might work. Most analysts contacted for the Oct. 12 story concluded that the creation of separate risk pools for calculating the general public's premiums, and perhaps new plan offerings, would insulate federal employees from changes in their costs and coverage.

"Throwing the doors to that program wide open is the most basic and ubiquitous of coverage solutions," wrote health care blogger Ezra Klein, in his review of Clinton's plan.

But regardless how effective the proposal would be at getting the almost 47 million uninsured Americans covered, and how minimal the impact on federal employees might be, Clinton's plan seems to have struck another nerve with readers. Opening FEHBP to the public would, a number of them said, take away one of the incentives that's meant to compensate for lower salaries and dedication to the public's welfare.

Federal employees' faith in their health benefits is no small matter. In the 2006 Office of Personnel Management Federal Benefits Survey, 75 percent of respondents said their health benefits were very important to them, and 62 percent said their health benefits were very or moderately competitive with the benefits available to nonfederal employees.

"I empathize with those uninsured due to the high rate of medical costs; however, why should the federal workforce have to pay higher insurance rates to offset costs by those unemployed …," a response signed "CAE" stated. "Mrs. Clinton's attempt to pacify the unemployed at the expense of federal workers is ludicrous, particularly when federal workers' salaries are not commensurate with either the private sector or the military."

Other readers said the government should try to make the maximum use of existing programs, and encourage Americans to be more fiscally responsible, before turning to the FEHBP to cover the uninsured.

"So what if there are 40 million uninsured," Bob Coleman's response continued. "Until there are honest numbers including those that have the ability to pay for it but don't, and an explanation to the public of what [the State Children's Health Insurance Program] and other programs already pay for, I don't want to hear about Hillary trying to reach into my pocket for anything."

Even the readers that expressed more sympathy toward the uninsured said they would be more comfortable with a plan modeled on FEHBP or one that guaranteed that federal employees wouldn't have to pay higher premiums than the public.

"Please note that the first word in the acronym is 'Federal' and the second is 'Employees," JB wrote. "I do agree that there needs to be a similar plan for working people who cannot afford the high-priced insurance coverage. It can be similar, but not connected to FEHBP in any way."

"I wouldn't have any problem opening up the Fed benefits for non feds AS LONG AS there are no special provisions made for these people that allow them cheaper premiums than what everyone else pays," Valek wrote. But at least one reader did see opening FEHBP as a way of giving back to taxpayers who make it possible for federal employees to receive the benefits his fellow commenters were so eager to protect.

"Just [because] we are [federal employees] and are covered under a [health care] program," a reader named Scott asked, "does that mean we should turn our back on the people who help pay our salaries, our [health care premiums] ...? I don't think so….People need a reality check; we need to start taking care of our own."