However, compared to individuals with insurance they are more likely to have low incomes and education levels and to be from a racial minority group.They are also more likely to be under the age of 35, unmarried, and single parents.
In terms of labor market effects, employer mandates are by far the most costly.
The authors find that although these mandates successfully increase the number of newly insured individuals, they do so at the cost of over 995,000 jobs.
This is similar to the 2006 budget proposal by President Bush.
The policy considered in this study would allot up to $1,000 per adult and $500 per child with a maximum of $3,000 per family.
Legislation often exempts smaller firms (defined anywhere from 10 to 50 employees), and part-time employees (often defined as 20 hours per week).
Coverage for dependents varies, but will clearly increase both the potential costs and benefits of a proposal.
For workers earning well above the minimum wage, we would expect additional health care costs to be fully offset by lower wages, resulting in a 1.98% decrease in wages or 3.47% with an individual mandate.
The added health care costs would lead to a 1.03% decrease in employment or 1.81% with an individual mandate, or the loss of nearly 1 million jobs (1.7 million with an individual mandate).
Assuming dependent coverage is included under the mandate, this translates into new coverage for 13 million people without an individual mandate and 22.8 million people with an individual mandate.
Health costs for private employers would increase by 8.6% or 15.1% with an individual mandate.
In January 2006, Maryland passed a mandate that was later struck down by the courts on the grounds that it was preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).