On Monday, the Senate stopped a filibuster after four Republicans voted with all 59 Democrats to take up a bill, most likely Thursday, that would extend a federal subsidy to help newly laid off workers stay on their employers' health insurance.

The subsidy is indeed generous. The federal government will continue to pay 65 percent of a laid-off worker's health-care premium. Congress passed the first premium subsidy at the height of the Great Recession when scores of people were laid off. The subsidy is good for at least 18 months. 

Combined with extensions of unemployment benefits, these federal subsidies are keeping mind and body together for many a laid off American. It is for many the difference between having to decide between food and medicine.

I know this reality firsthand. In February, I was laid off.

In the past, when I left an employer, I never opted to extend my health coverage through COBRA because it was always prohibitively expensive. Plus, I'm young and healthy. I don't take any medicine. It always made more financial sense to go without insurance and hope for the best. On the few occasions I needed to see a doctor, I would pay out of pocket at some low-cost clinic.

Still, going without insurance always made me worry and created a sense of unease and added to the overall stress of being a freelance journalist. One time, at least, that stress caused me to get sick enough to see a doctor.

Getting laid-off today is different. Better. Kinder. Gentler. Not only do I get the federal subsidy but, in fact, my health-care costs actually go down. When you're suddenly living off unemployment benefits, this is the difference between keeping insurance and chucking it. It seemed like a no-brainer. I kept my insurance.

The question I think about now is this: clearly, the decision to keep my insurance was a great deal for me. But did the decision to hold on to my insurance actually help my former employer? Did it help the health system as a whole?

I can't help but think yes.

Under normal circumstances, employers hate COBRA. That's because it is too expensive. An employee who extends their health insurance under COBRA pays 102 percent of the premium-the two percent extra covers the company's administrative costs. With the average family premium costing $13,375 a year, someone who doesn't have an income and who still has to pay the rent and afford food must pay $1,137 a month just to have health insurance.

For most people that's unaffordable. Unless, of course, you are sick and you know your monthly health-care costs total more than your monthly premium. Then, even though it's a lot of money, sucking up the cost is still a relative bargain for you.

For your former employer, on the other hand, it's a raw deal. COBRA sets up a classic case of adverse selection: it's so prohibitively expensive that only someone with a lot of health-care costs would see it as a bargain worth paying for.

Last January, Janet Trautwein, CEO of the National Association of Health Underwriters, wrote on the Web site of the National Journal that most employers report that COBRA participants actually cost the employer as much as 150 percent more than the average plan participant due to adverse selection.

She wrote that she supported a temporary COBRA subsidy to help laid off workers but insisted that the subsidy remain temporary. A survey last year before the subsidy took effect by Spencer's Benefits Reports said that health coverage for employees using COBRA was 54 percent more costly for employers than coverage for the average worker.

Nearly 15 months later, the subsidy continues to be doled out to anyone who is laid off. I am still looking for a survey that quantifies my theory, but my feeling is that the subsidy has actually kept more healthy, young laid-off employees on their employers benefit rolls. Together with the federal government, we are paying premiums that offset the cost of unhealthy workers who may still be with the company. Surely, the subsidy has helped offset the adverse selection that normally occurs when only sick, unhealthy people with lots of health-care costs continue their employer's health insurance.

In addition to keeping my mind and body together, the federal subsidy is helping keep employer health benefits costs stable. Not a bad kind of stealth stimulus. Normally, you only hear employers speak up when there is something to complain to the federal government about. Well, Uncle Sam, on behalf of me and my former employer: thank you.