Government mandates in family benefits versus private sector benefits

If we are heading toward a government run healthcare system, the federal government has more of a reason to try and prevent same sex unions (which is going to cost more money to them if they are required to offer spouses healthcare).  Private insurers, on the other hand, would (and do still to some degree) have the ability to court businesses by offering to cover same sex unions.  Companies that would pay the premium for this type of insurance would attract talent.  And some companies have already figured this out.  This is the free market at work.   Levi's, American Apparel, Nike, Boeing, Microsoft, Apple, American Airlines, Google, Starbucks and IBM are just some of the companies recognized recently for offering benefits to same sex partners in the workplace.  This is the market at work.  Offering benefits in a non-discriminatory capacity to workers attracts talent. The companies profit from their policies. However, if it's left to the government to decide, you never know what you'll get.  You may have voters deciding whether you qualify for government healthcare as a gay/lesbian spouse much like they are deciding now whether you can even enter into such a union.