Universal partner benefits would have a dramatic effect on the currently uninsured; same-sex couples face big disadvantages

October 18, 2006

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Media Contacts:
M.V. Lee Badgett, Research Director, Williams Institute, badgett@law.ucla.edu, 310.825.5847
Cathy Renna, cathy@rennacommunications.com, 917.757.6123
Syd Peterson, syd@rennacommunications.com, 917.621.6411

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA-- The Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy released a report today on unequal access to employment-based health insurance for same-sex and unmarried different-sex couples. The study, published this month in the peer-reviewed journal "Contemporary Economic Policy," analyzes new data on health insurance for couples from the Current Population Survey (CPS), a monthly government survey of the labor force.

The newly published study found that unmarried couples were significantly less likely to have health insurance than married people. The number of uninsured people in unmarried couples would drop significantly if employers offered health insurance to domestic partners. However, employers would experience only a small increase in health insurance enrollment and costs if they offered partner coverage.

"Most Americans who are younger than 65 get health insurance through their own job or a family member's job, so excluding employees' partners from coverage puts unmarried couples at a big disadvantage." said M.V. Lee Badgett, Research Director at the Williams Institute and co-author of the study. "We found that 20% of people in same-sex couples are uninsured, compared with only 10% of married people or 15% of the overall population.

Unmarried heterosexuals with partners are even worse off, with almost one-third uninsured."

"If employers provided equal benefits to their employees in unmarried couples, they could cut the number of uninsured unmarried partners by 30-40%," noted Michael Ash, co-author of the study and associate professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Despite the attention given to large employers that provide domestic partner benefits, earlier studies show that a minority of all companies provide them. "Employers might be hesitant to offer partner coverage because of extra costs," Ash added. "But our study found that employers offering domestic partnership benefits would see only a small enrollment increase of 1.4% to 2.1% of its overall workforce. And small enrollment increases mean very small cost increases."

Badgett noted that gay, lesbian, and bisexual people are at a particular disadvantage with regard to health insurance benefits, since they cannot legally marry a same-sex partner in any state except Massachusetts, and only a few other states offer some kind of legal recognition. If states legally recognized same-sex relationships, access to employer health coverage could improve significantly for same-sex partners. Ironically, policies that would promote partner benefits for all unmarried couples would benefit different-sex couples even more than gay couples. "Different-sex partners signing up for benefits would outnumber same-sex partners by a nine to one margin," she said.

"When employers do not provide equal coverage for the important long-term, committed relationships of unmarried employees, those employees' families are vulnerable to receiving poor or no health care," said Brad Sears, Executive Director of the Williams Institute. "Offering domestic partnership benefits will bring about a decline in the number of uninsured people, reduced social costs, and an substantial increase in Americans' health and well-being."

To schedule an interview with the principal researchers or a spokesperson from the Williams Institute, please contact Renna Communications.

The Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy advances law and public policy through rigorous, independent research and scholarship, and disseminates its work through a variety of education programs and media to judges, legislators, lawyers, other policy makers and the public. This study can be accessed at the Williams Institute website: