The Foundry article:
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/10/13/new-york-times-baucus-bill-breaks-obama-promise/
New York Times: Baucus Bill Breaks Obama Promise
Posted October 13th, 2009 at 1.41pm in Health Care.
On August 12th, President Barack Obama promised the American people: “Under the reform we’re proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.”
But if you read the New York Times closely today you learn that the Baucus bill set for a vote today in the Senate Finance Committee breaks that promise. The NYT reports:
Under the Finance Committee bill, the tax would be imposed beginning in 2013 on employer- sponsored health plans with total premiums exceeding $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for families, regardless of whether the coverage was paid for by the employer, the individual or both. The tax would be paid by insurers, who would be expected to pass along the cost to customers.
Critics say that would mean an increase in premiums or in out-of-pocket expenses for employees, raising medical costs for individuals and families.
Supporters say the more likely prospect is that employers would bargain-hunt or take other steps to avoid the tax, putting pressure on insurers to offer cheaper coverage and slowing the rise in medical costs for everyone.
In other words, instead of Americans keeping the health insurance they have now, Obamacare would force employers to cut costs and “bargain-hunt” for less generous plans.
And this is how everyone goes on the Public Plan because private insurance companies can not compete with a non-profit health care plan.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_v9fMU8ed0-he24ipb9LKjjNHKCfz3kb5FkTki9s_NiHPQPxLlamT8wOnOsetzpeK2DdYmt5fUx3jZjLaD1dLjDtynCHxVoaEfry-rDWcfYQLmAUsFtUxrmHV6720Nq-xwMgH3fNClleG6PxyqLwfeH=s0-d)
The other option is that insurance companies find ways to charge just below those thresholds to avoid the tax. Also, individual and companies may simply switch to plans that are just below the threshold.
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me of the one tax increase that Reagan did, which was a luxury tax or private planes and yachts. Both industries collapsed, and the Fed paid out more in unemployment benefits to people that lost their jobs in those industries than they ever collected on the tax.
Attempt to tax the rich, and they move their wealth elsewhere. We all pay in the end.
Hahaha, I bet the lib-dems didn't see that coming. Oh wait--THEY wanted it that way!
ReplyDeleteWell, let's just wait and see just how well their "hope & change" is working for them when they LOSE their healthcare insurance etc etc etc.
I honestly cannot believe that this thing may actually pass through. Which is why I posted my last blog, based on the 'Ben Ferguson Show'. It is really getting scary out there by this dictatorship-style government, and I can only "HOPE" that the lib-dems will wake up, open their eyes and ears, smell the strong black coffee, and help us "CHANGE" things in 2012.
Great article post, thank you for sharing.
UCOA:
ReplyDeleteThey HOPE it works that way so everyone will be on government health care.
The whole economy going into to tank is part of Obama's plan to destroy our country as it's been in the past and turn it into France.
I'll check your post out later on this evening.
Thanks for stopping by!
Matt:
ReplyDeleteAttempt to tax the rich, and they move their wealth elsewhere. We all pay in the end.
Truer words were never spoken.
I used to price healt care premiums for a living, so I offer this.
ReplyDeleteThe $8000/$21000 tax threshold is an obvious attempt to go after those with "Cadillac" plans.
An $8000 plan (approx $667 per member per month) is certainly a much richer benefit for compainies with a younger workforce, than those with an older workforce.
Bottom line, this tax is going to affect 50 something employees much more than it will those in their twenties or thirties, especially males who don't bear children.
Too take what Matt said a bit further, Companies can get below the threshold by hiring more young males.
BRTR:
ReplyDeleteOops...then you have another problem. Discrimination against women and older workers.
I keep posting on various blogs that the Baucus bill is immaterial. That bill will have to be merged with the other Senate bill before it goes to the Senate floor. And, after that, the Senate and House bills will have to be merged in conference. With 4 out of 5 bills in Congress calling for a public plan, it is not a stretch of the imagination that the final bill will have a public option. And, who knows what other abominations.
ReplyDeleteThe citizens won't get to read and digest the bill before a vote is taken. Congress will see to that.
I put a lot of effort into HR3200 so I would know what was in the bill. I am not putting forth that same effort into the Baucus bill or any other committee bill because it just won't matter. The only bill that matters now is the final bill.
Congress is treating us like children right now, and not very smart children at that. I remember my own children challenging me on various decisions and hollering. "That's not fair." And it wasn't fair. But that was my family, not my country. Congress is saying the same thing to us right now. It's not fair and we don't care.
I guess I have one more comment. It does amaze me that presidential candidates campaign on promises that can only be fulfilled by Congress. Then, if Congress does not deliver, everyone hollers a campaign promise is broken.
ReplyDeleteI'm not endorsing BHO here, just pointing out that the legislative branch and the executive branch of our government are two separate entities. The Congress can send any legislation to the WH, campaign promises of the president not withstanding. The only recourse of the president, to keep a campaign promise, is a veto,an action most presidents are loathe to use.
I will wait for the final bill before I holler about broken promises.
emptynester:
ReplyDeleteYour point is well taken about presidents and their promises. I don't think Obama really cares about promises as long as he gets his precious health care bill. He'll probably blame Pres. Bush for him not being able to keep his promises.
All kidding aside, I don't think he cares. He'll make the promises, he'll let Congress do the dirty work, and then he'll sign the bill because, even though it's not exactly what he promised, he'll sign it because we can't wait any longer...another crisis, you know???
What you say about the Baucus legislation is correct. It's going to be merged with other bills and everything has to be voted on again.