Senate Bill 189 versus PEBTF Domestic Partner policy

     Senate Bill 189 (Act 4 of 2009) which will go in effect 1/1/10 expands health coverage for children of insured parents.  It allows adults up to age 30, under certain conditions to remain covered by their parent%u2019s health insurance.  Those eligible children are unmarried, have no dependents, are residents of the commonwealth or enrolled as full-time students at and institution of higher education and not provided private insurance coverage or enrolled in government benefits.  The age prior to this was 19.  The coverage is at the discretion of the employer but in our case it is PEBTF.  Now this is the knocker that seems biased and unfair.  PEBTF will honor the bill BUT PEBTF is not required to follow the requirements within this bill since our plan is not insured. The Board of Trustee%u2019s has historically maintained their plans in compliance with applicable health insurance mandates; they have approved to adopt the requirements under this bill effective 01/01/10.  Members will be allowed to add/continue coverage for eligible dependents up until their 30th birthday. Members will be responsible for a monthly premium for coverage with these eligible dependents under Senate Bill 189. The monthly premium rates will be close to our monthly cobra rates for coverage.  

     BUT PEBTF passed on April 18, 2009 that PEBTF & REHP Members Can Extend Benefits to unmarried Domestic Partners.  It was effective July 1, 2009 that commonwealth employees enrolled in Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund benefits and retirees enrolled in the Retired Employees Health Program may extend coverage to certified domestic partners (same sex and opposite sex).  How can PEBTF stand by domestic unmarried partners with no INCREASE IN PREMIUM but they will not stand by our children who are in school and are suppose to be our future?  Governor Rendell stresses the importance of education and now is a factor in PA not getting the budget passed.  EDUCATION is important.  Guess PEBTF doesn%u2019t think this way.  Something is wrong with the picture here.    

     Senator Longietti's House Bill 838 would have helped the parents and students but the Senate would not pass his bill and instead passed Senator Corman%u2019s bill Senate Bill 189. Bill 189 said the employee must pay for the added coverage and the child is only added if the policyholder (typically the employer but for us it is PEBTF agrees to have them added which they will in January but for a premium. Senator Longietti%u2019s bill would have helped the parents and students because it stressed the employer or PEBTF in our would cover the premiums.     

     PEBTF needs to RECONSIDER and quit being biased.  Please help to circulate this and to sign the petition.  Please let anyone and everyone know by email, word of mouth or whatever it takes.  Forward the petition to friends, family or whoever.  If you would like to file a letter of complaint to PEBTF regarding Senate Bill 189 versus Domestic Partner policy, please write to;

Attn: BOT Complaint

PEBTF

150 S 43rd Street

Suite 1

Harrisburg, PA 17111

THANK YOU