In proposing a legislative remedy for the lack of insurance parity, Roukema anticipated objections from business and industry, pointing out that a study of the financial effects of parity legislation by the National Advisory Mental Health Council suggested that a parity mandate would increase health care costs by no more than 1 percent. She also cited a finding from the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) that assessed the effects of the limited parity legislation enacted in 1996, of which she was also the chief sponsor. The SAMHSA study discovered that 86 percent of the companies who had met the limited parity requirements in their sponsored health plans had incurred no cost increases in providing those upgraded benefits. The data clearly show, she noted, "that parity is not prohibitively expensive" and, in light of the increased productivity and reduction in the number of days lost to sickness, is in fact "a good investment."