A new Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ruling may draw Congress into a politically sensitive debate over health care coverage.

The commission voted on April 22 to adopt a proposed rule that would allow companies to reduce health benefits they provide to retirees older than 65 – the age at which seniors qualify for the federal Medicare program.

The rule would give legal protection to employers who, in effect, shift some of the cost of their retirees’ health care to the government program. AARP opposes the proposed rule, and contends that Congress will ultimately have to weigh in with legislation requiring that employers provide equivalent health coverage out of their own pockets for all retirees, regardless of their age.

Congress is in no hurry to intervene. Some warn that forcing companies to pay as much for older retirees’ health coverage as they do for their younger retirees will tempt employers to provide less for all retirees.

Companies routinely offer retirees over 65 coverage that supplements Medicare benefits, instead of a more complete package of health benefits that employers usually offer workers who are not eligible for Medicare.

Lawmakers tried to address this issue during last year’s debate on the Medicare prescription law. The Senate passed version of the bill, included language similar to the EEOC ruling. However, to gain AARP’s support for the bill, lawmakers dropped that provision.

Both AARP and employer groups would like to see their positions written into law. Lawmakers opposing the rule could seek to offer an amendment to a fiscal 2005 appropriations bill that would deny the EEOC funding to implement its new rule.

The proposed EEOC rule will be reviewed by relevant federal agencies and the Office of Management and Budget.