Dear visualops,
"My guess is this will have a detrimental effect on business, and employers will think twice about hiring that extra hand."
Perhaps not in that way.
A lot of smaller businesses may be tempted to drop their health insurance plans, pay the $295 per year per employee, and dump the problem on the state, as the state seems to be so explicitly inviting. That could actually cause some employers to hire more folks.
The difference for me would be a 90% reduction in the cost of providing health insurance to my employees. Yippee! I could hire an extra person under those circumstances.
In the overall scheme of things, I suspect that as smaller businesses do this, and the costs to the state start to skyrocket, the state will have to raise taxes somewhere, somehow. Maybe the $295/employee annual tax goes up. Maybe something else has to give.
But then the cost of health care will likely be socialized across the broader tax-base, rather than being borne principally, and directly by business.
I don't think folks will like the eventual outcome, but I'm not sure that it will especially depress hiring by employers.
sitetest
Employers should be required to provide a plan, not a cash amount. Participation gets a big boost, more available cash = lower rates, and employer costs are passed on to the consumer.