1. State Variation in Health Insurance
Coverage Among Same-Sex Couples
Gilbert Gonzales
Gender and Health Interest Group Meeting
Orlando, FL
June 23, 2012
Funded by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
2. Background: Who are same-sex couples?
โข Sexual minorities
Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender (GLBT)
โข Partnered
Married
Civil Union
Domestic Partnership
Unmarried, but cohabitating
2
4. Why does marriage matter?
โข Most Americans are covered through a family
memberโs employer health plan
๏ง โLegalโ spouse
๏ง Dependent children
Example: University of Minnesota, Office of Human Resources
4
5. The role of employers
Large employers (500+ employees) offering same-sex domestic partner
benefits
39% 39%
34% 34%
29%
27%
24%
21%
19%
16%
12%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Source: 2011 Mercer National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans
5
6. Improvements vary by region
Same-sex domestic partner coverage among large employers (500+ employees)
64%
59% 2009
52% 2010
49%
39% 39%
28% 26% 27%
24%
All large West Midwest Northeast South
employers
Source: 2011 Mercer National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans
6
7. Federal barriers to coverage
โข Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)
๏ง Does not recognize same-sex unions at the federal level
๏ง Insurance for same-sex spouses treated as taxable
income (adds $1,000 annually)
โข Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
๏ง Self-insured employers are regulated by the federal
government, not states
๏ง Health insurance coverage is mandated for same-sex
spouses in 16 states, but state mandates only reach
fully-insured employers (42% private employees)
Source: Badget MVL. The economic value of marriage for same-sex couples. Drake Law Review. 2010.
7
8. What are the outcomes?
โข Men and women in same-sex couples are less
likely to have health insurance
BRFSS (Buchmueller & Carpenter, 2010)
CPS (Ash & Badget, 2006)
NHIS (Heck et al., 2006)
8
9. What are the outcomes?
โข Men and women in same-sex couples are less
likely to have health insurance
BRFSS (Buchmueller & Carpenter, 2010)
CPS (Ash & Badget, 2006)
NHIS (Heck et al., 2006)
โข What can the American Community Survey tell us
about national and regional disparities in health
insurance coverage?
9
10. Methods
1. Multinomial Logit: Marginal Effects
Yij = ฮฑ + ฮฒ1Maritali + ฮฒiXi + ฮต
2. State-Level Coverage Estimates
3. Coverage Across the Life Continuum
10
11. GLB Inclusion in the American Community Survey
โข Same-sex spouses / unmarried partners
โข What is an unmarried partner?
An โunmarried partner,โ also known as a domestic partner, is a
person who shares a close personal relationship with Person 1.
11
12. Control Variables & Outcomes
โข Educational attainment โข Health Insurance
โข Age โข Employer-Sponsored
Insurance (ESI)
โข Sex
โข Individual
โข Race โข Medicare
โข Employment โข Medicaid
โข Hours Worked โข Uninsured
โข Industry
โข Own child in household
โข Citizenship
12
13. Limitations to the ACS
โข Missing Information
โข Sexual orientation and gender identity
โข Health status
โข Firm size
โข Source of coverage (own ESI or dependent)
โข Missing Same-Sex Couples
โข If identified as roommates or unrelated adults
โข If neither is the respondent
13
14. Larger sample size compared to previous studies
Non-elderly adults in same-sex relationships
17,420
16,235
Men
Women
2,881
2,384
316 298 486 478
NHIS CPS BRFSS ACS
1997-2003 1996-2003 2000-2007 2008-2010
Heck et al. 2006 Ash & Badget 2006 Buchmueller & Gonzales, forthcoming
Carpenter 2010
14
22. Coverage Gaps in ESI
Compared to Married Opposite-Sex Couples
22
23. Uninsurance over the Life Continuum
50%
45%
40% Same-Sex Couples
35%
Married Opposite-Sex Couples
Uninsured
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Age
23
24. ESI over the Life Continuum
80% Same-Sex Couples
Employer-Sponsored Insurance
70% Married Opposite-Sex Couples
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Age
24
25. Summary
โข Men and women in same-sex couples are
roughly 10% less likely to be insured through
an employer
โข Same-sex couples have lower rates of
coverage than married, opposite-sex couples
in all but 7 states
โข Across the life continuum, partnered sexual
minorities are less likely than their married
peers to be covered by an employer
25
26. Policy Implications
โข Potential for states to require fully insured
employers to extend benefits to same-sex
spouses
โข Employers can voluntarily expand coverage to
same-sex spouses as strategy to attract
employees
โข Repealing DOMA could remove barriers to
coverage for same-sex couples
26
27. Gilbert Gonzales, MHA
Doctoral Student
Graduate Research Assistant
gonza440@umn.edu
University of Minnesota
School of Public Health
Division of Health Policy & Management
Sign up to receive our newsletter and updates at
www.shadac.org
@shadac