2007•The William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository (William & Mary)Open access

The New Massachusetts Health Law: Preemption and Experimentation

Edward A. Zelinsky

Open full text 2 citations

Abstract

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) preempts major features of the new Massachusetts health law. Although regrettable, this conclusion is mandated by ERISA's statutory terminology and the controlling case law. Other states, in fashioning their health care policies, are looking at elements of the new Massachusetts law. Just as ERISA preempts the individual and business contribution mandates of the Massachusetts statute, ERISA will preempt any similar provisions adopted by other states.\nBecause state experimentation with health care is particularly desirable today, Congress should, at a minimum, amend ERISA to validate the new Massachusetts health law. More comprehensively, Congress should amend ERISA Section 514 to permit all states to experiment with health care reform insofar as such experiments relate to employer-provided health care. Ideally, Congress should repeal section 514 and thus abolish altogether the jurisprudence of ERISA preemption.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) preempts major features of the new Massachusetts health law. Although regrettable, this conclusion is mandated by ERISA's statutory terminology and the controlling case law. Other states, in fashioning their health care policies, are looking at elements of the new Massachusetts law. Just as ERISA preempts the individual and business contribution mandates of the Massachusetts statute, ERISA will preempt any similar provisions adopted by other states.\nBecause state experimentation with health care is particularly desirable today, Congress should, at a minimum, amend ERISA to validate the new Massachusetts health law. More comprehensively, Congress should amend ERISA Section 514 to permit all states to experiment with health care reform insofar as such experiments relate to employer-provided health care. Ideally, Congress should repeal section 514 and thus abolish altogether the jurisprudence of ERISA preemption.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) preempts major features of the new Massachusetts health law. Although regrettable, this conclusion is mandated by ERISA's statutory terminology and the controlling case law. Other states, in fashioning their health care policies, are looking at elements of the new Massachusetts law. Just as ERISA preempts the individual and business contribution mandates of the Massachusetts statute, ERISA will preempt any similar provisions adopted by other states.\nBecause state experimentation with health care is particularly desirable today, Congress should, at a minimum, amend ERISA to validate the new Massachusetts health law. More comprehensively, Congress should amend ERISA Section 514 to permit all states to experiment with health care reform insofar as such experiments relate to employer-provided health care. Ideally, Congress should repeal section 514 and thus abolish altogether the jurisprudence of ERISA preemption.

Key concepts: Employee Retirement Income Security Act, Repeal, Health law, Preemption, Mandate, Health care, Law, Federal law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The New Massachusetts Health Law: Preemption and Experimentation — Research Paper | ScholarLens