Is a slip in employer-based health care coverage indicative of a struggling economy?

The public policy and research arm of Excellus made that conclusion in a recent study:

"Most indicators show that the downstate economy is faring much better than the upstate economy now, which likely explains the difference in the employment-based coverage trends."

I, however, think they are leaving out some important information. It's no secret that employers are shying away from health care coverage considering the outrageous costs in the United States--especially given the move to a more "service-based economy" domestically. In fact, a recent study proves my point:

"The decline in employer coverage was pervasive and felt throughout the country. When comparing the 1999-2000 and 2004-05 periods, 34 states experienced significant losses in coverage with Indiana, Utah, Maryland, and Missouri experiencing losses in excess of 8 percentage points. No state experienced a significant increase in their employer-provided coverage rate."

Given the cost of living in New York City, I can't help but to wonder if some service workers--those most likely not to receive benefits--have been driven to living outside of New York State and commuting. In fact, looking at the cited study, New York is the only state that posted any sort of gain in coverage.

With this in mind, I'm a little disappointed in Excellus for making that statement in their press release. Employer-based coverage fell 2.2%, so if that indicates our economy is struggling, then we should really pity the people in North Carolina as their drop is in excess of 5%. I believe it's simply a national trend and downstate is an outlier. Unfortunately, Excellus' public relations representative reported it a little differently on a local television station. I e-mailed Excellus a few days back with my comments, so if I hear back, I'll update you here.

Update 2/18/2007: I received no response from my e-mail to Excellus. I even noticed traffic from the Excellus domain to this blog. So, I'll assume I had a fair point. :-)