There is widespread agreement that one of the key issues in Washington DC and Springfield in 2007 will be expanding health care to every person. Indeed, both the National Council of State Legislatures and Governing Magazine listed health care in their top-ten lists of issues confronting policymakers this year.

And why shouldn't they? According to the Census Bureau, there are an estimated 46.6 million of us nationally who are not covered by a health insurance policy. In Illinois, that number stands at 1.6 million. Since 2006, when Massachusetts passed a sweeping plan requiring everyone in the state to have health insurance, the issue of universal coverage has raised to the top of the policy agenda in many states including Illinois.

Following reelection in November, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty announced plans to move the Land of 10,000 lakes towards universal coverage. In California where more than 6.5 million residents are uninsured, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently outlined a $4.6 billion program as his top priority for 2007.

Closer to home, Governor Rod Blagojevich spent much of his inaugural address calling for a revolutionary state program to cover every man, woman and child. Following on the heels of the governor's nascent AllKids program, Democrat legislators are apparently hearing the Siren call of health care, and paving the way is a report released last fall by the governor's Adequate Health Care Task Force that outlines an ambitious $1.4 billion universal health care plan for Illinois funded by a new payroll tax on employers. Many pundits believe that proposal will be the starting point for implementing a program by the end of the year.

To be sure, there are problems with the Task Force report, not the least of which is the expectation that the business community is just chomping at the bit to pay another billion dollars for a new government program. Had the Task Force included anyone from the business community, that information might have been shared.

Most of the conjecture on Illinois' plan centers on employers that don't already coverage and individuals who refuse to pay for insurance. Since about 98 percent of our members already provide health care benefits to their employees, most of you may be breathing a sigh of relief. I have one word on that subject: don't.

There's a reason a business "refuses" to pay for health insurance for employees: they can't afford it. While policymakers know that, they are faced with a mounting crush of Medicaid bills and an electorate who are demanding more help. If there's a revenue shortfall—and most believe there will be—Illinois businesses are an attractive target to once again come to the rescue. But we're starting to see a glimmer of recognition from those in power in Springfield. Rhetoric aside, the whispers in the halls of power are asking pragmatic question on how the heck they can make all this work.

Of course, every health coverage scenario that is being discussed is fraught with problems. For example, the California-style proposal taxes businesses at four percent of their payrolls if they don't offer insurance and would also tax revenues of medical providers. Some business owners may crunch the numbers and figure it's cheaper to fork over the tax than pay for decent coverage. And raise your hand if you think that the final coverage will be the type that employees will want.

You can bet on a real hullabaloo in Springfield this spring when these initiatives hit the fan. But many are bound and determined to continue the push toward universal health care no matter what it takes. Is it any wonder we live in a state that faces a long-term debt of more than $100 billion even though the law requires "balanced" budgets?

I'm going to have to pick up my dictionary are look up "balanced." I thought it meant something else.

More IMA News