Not that I'm necessarily up in arms about that, but since McCain has absolutely sworn up and down that he'd be as much of a plutocrat as George W. Bush, it strikes me as interesting:
Mr. Holtz-Eakin calculated that workers in the top income tax bracket would have to pay more in taxes if their employers have been contributing at least $14,285 toward a family insurance premium. Nationwide, the average cost of a family policy is $12,106, with employers paying $8,824 of that amount.
While the change would primarily affect those with gold-plated insurance policies, health analysts point out that middle-income workers with conventional coverage could conceivably pay more in regions where insurance costs are high. Over time, that might depend on how the tax credits are adjusted for inflation, a detail Mr. McCain has not discussed.
Mr. McCain has said he would maintain the Bush-era income tax cuts and support other tax reductions, and he has pledged repeatedly that he would not raise taxes. “Do you mean none?” Sean Hannity, the Fox News host, asked in a March 16 interview.
“None,” Mr. McCain replied.
Did you read his lips, there?
Cosponsors [as of 2008-01-28]
Sen. Lamar Alexander [R-TN]
Sen. Robert Bennett [R-UT]
Sen. Thomas Carper [D-DE]
Sen. Norm Coleman [R-MN]
Sen. Michael Crapo [R-ID]
Sen. Charles Grassley [R-IA]
Sen. Judd Gregg [R-NH]
Sen. Mary Landrieu [D-LA]
Sen. Joseph Lieberman [I-CT]
Sen. Trent Lott [R-MS]
Sen. Bill Nelson [D-FL]
Sen. Debbie Ann Stabenow [D-MI]
<
p>Maybe there’s hope that we’ll get Universal Health Care in America after all.
<
p>Source:
http://www.govtrack.us/congres…
Nice job slipping Joe Lieberman on the list of Republicans.
<
p>While I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment he technically is not a Senate republican (yet) so he should not be on the list.
He included all 12 cosponsors, including the Republicans, Democrats, and Connecticut for Liebermans.
<
p>He never claimed the list was completely Republicans.
I think that company-sponsored health insurance is actually a pretty big impediment against labor mobility, which I would argue is a bad thing (employers that treat their employees relatively poorly- but offer decent health coverage- may disagree).
<
p>And while the ad is kind of funny, is it really a smart idea to illustrate the concept with employees goofing off? I’m no great marketer, but really…
One miracle and one unanswered question.
<
p>First, to recap the Wyden plan:
<
p>1) The plan nukes SCHIP and Medicaid. No small miracle, and replace them with this new thing, so that the poor remain covered;
<
p>2) Create incentives to delink employers from health insurance, so that the middle class and upper class remain covered;
<
p>3) Make it illegal for an insurance company to decline coverage;
<
p>3) MANDATE coverage, so that the people who don’t have insurance now, will have to have insurance under threat of penalty, so that the working poor — that is, the class who is currently uninsured — are now insured, or else. That’s where the miracle occurs. The working poor can’t or won’t buy insurance now, but will buy it if we make them. Yeah, I’m sceptical.
<
p>So far, this whole thing sounds a lot like Hillarycare.
<
p>4) What kind of coverage? The standard coverage that is offered to Federal workers. Is that to say that this healthcare option creates Healthcare as a right, and that every person whether it’s the homeless guy on the street or the Governor of Massachusetts will be entitled to precisely the same coverage?
<
p>Notwithstanding how the miracle occurs, it’s hard to see how “universal” coverage can happen until we as a society first figure out FIRST, whether healthcare is a right and SECOND, how much that right entitles us too at a minimum and THIRD, how we can compel a healthcare provider to give us his services simply because we’re entitled to them.
re: Your second #3: Yeah, the sticky part is with the folks who are not subsidized enough to feel comfortable affording health coverage. And wherever you draw that line, some folks are just not going to feel coverage is affordable. Indeed, in Massachusetts, folks between ~30k-45k (not sure of the exact numbers) are exempt from the mandate, which really isn’t so great: They’re economically quite vulnerable to health care bills, but can’t afford coverage either.
<
p>And then there’s the subsidy effect …
as a society, how can we compel a white landlord to ‘give’ his rental services to a black family, yet allow healthcare providers to deny life or death services to whomever they wish?
<
p>
It's no HR676.
I am very concerned about the provisions elimianting Medicaid and SCHIP. Both of those programs have been incredibly effective and even conservative Republicans have been willing to support and keep them in place.
<
p>Switching to the Wyden-Bennet plan which might be a better plan in the long run will still have a ton of transaction costs as we switch from SCHIP/Medicaid to the new program.
<
p>Also I am wary of any law that mandates that the working poor buy private insurance, I would much rather we expand Medicare/Medicaid to cover the working poor.
<
p>Their is a large pool of people making between 20k-40k a year, mostly at minimum wage jobs with little or no health benefits. First of all we should celebrate these people since they are hard working and could easily choose not to work to become eligible for welfare and Medicaid benefits.
<
p>Moreover these people in many cases spend most of their income on health insurance anyway especially if their employers are not covering them, or still have to put a significant fraction of their pay to health coverage programs.
<
p>So expanding government health insurance to those people, instead of punitive mandates, would both contribute to covering everybody while also giving these people a great safety net so that they can keep more money in their pockets and perhaps use that money to find their way to the American dream.
<
p>It will be very interesting to see what happens though, most of the Senate supports this bill and said that regardless of who gets elected they would want the next President to pass the Senate bill rather than their own plans.