A tax hike to pay for health care plan?
One of the main questions about the Obama administration's health care overhaul is how to pay for it. Over the weekend one of President Obama's top advisers gave a hint. Sam Eaton reports it may involve a tax hike.
A doctor reads a blood pressure gauge during an examination of patient at the Codman Square Health Center in Dorchester, Mass. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
TEXT OF STORY
STEVE CHIOTAKIS: President Obama's been talking about an overhaul of health care, and one of the main questions about his plan is how to pay for it. Over the weekend we got a hint. And it may involve a tax hike. Marketplace's Sam Eaton reports.
SAM EATON: President Obama's top political adviser on Sunday said the White House wouldn't rule out a tax hike on employer-provided health insurance plans. This despite Obama's campaign promise to not raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000 a year.
David Axelrod spoke yesterday on ABC's "This Week." He said President Obama has no interest in "drawing lines in the sand" when it comes to funding the health care reform plan making its way through Congress.
DAVID AXELROD: The important thing at this point is to keep the process moving, to keep people at the table, to the keep the discussions going. We've gotten a long way down the road.
Democrats are pushing for the tax hike as a way to pay for the health care plan without increasing the federal deficit. Current proposals call for a tax on health plans that exceed about $17,000 for families, and just under $7,000 for individuals.
This week, in a Washington suburb, Obama is holding a town hall-style meeting in order to help sell the plan.
I'm Sam Eaton for Marketplace.
Comments
Comment | Refresh
From New York, NY, 06/29/2009
Tom Shilock,
Go to the website for Center for American Progress and you will find a series of excellent white papers covering several topics of concern to you - a few examples:
Financing Health Care Reform - to ensure the cost of reform is budget neutral
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/health_financing.html
Payment Reform to improve Health Care
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/health_payment_reform.html
Health System Modernization - will reduce the deficit
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/05/health_modernization.html
Fixing Our Broken Health Care System
Removing Obstacles to Generic Drug Competition
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/generic_drug_competition.html
Better Information, Better Decisions - Comparative Effectiveness Research will help us make better decisions
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/04/better_information.html
It's all quite inspiring.
From Portland, OR, 06/29/2009
"One of the main questions about the Obama administration's health care overhaul is how to pay for it." To the extent that this implies any reform would cost more it has the logic of "When did you stop beating your wife?"
Medical insurance from private corporations accounts for about 29 percent of aggregate health care costs in America. As Princeton's famous health care economist, Uwe Reinhnardt, has pointed out numerous times most of this is pure overhead from the perspective of value to patients. That's why health care in America costs more than anywhere else yet we get less for it. For the most part the only beneficiaries of medical insurance companies are medical insurance companies not their policy holders, who are increasingly their victims when they need expensive care. The argument that these business provide choice is ludicrous, as anyone who has been insured by them knows. In fact, they are all about limiting choice in order to supposedly control costs (out of plan vs. in plan, etc.).
Health insurance companies are involved in a protection racket that is worse than the Mafia's protection racket. At least the Mafia is smart enough not to bankrupt their victims. Whereas health insurance companies bankrupt their victims with outlandish premiums or impossible uncovered expenses when even moderate medical procedures or therapies are involved.
What Americans need is health care, not health insurance. Insurance is merely a mechanism that from the perspective of justice has failed. But because of their financial resources they are showing they can hold most Americans hostage by buying off congress and the Obama regime. What this lays bare is that America is an oligarchy, as Simon Johnson has said (cf. The Quiet Coup) or perhaps a plutocracy because while perhaps 75 percent of the American people want a single government health care program it is not happening. Liberty and justice for all? Well, only if you can afford it.
06/29/2009
I'd like to encourage you to read this promising study report. Public health plan could save money faster: policy group. WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A nationwide health insurance exchange that includes a Medicare-like government option could save $1.8 trillion more than if only private plans are offered, a prominent private U.S. health policy group said on Wednesday. Federal spending on health-related costs would still rise from 2010 to 2020, but they would be less with a plan that pays doctors and hospital rates similar to the Medicare program for the elderly and disabled, according to a report by the Commonwealth Fund. The New York-based health policy research group compared possible savings a health insurance exchange could bring under three different scenarios. One would include a Medicare-like plan along with private insurance. Another would instead offer a government-run plan with rates somewhat higher than Medicare. The final one would be private insurance with no government plan at all. Such an exchange would offer a central point for consumers to shop for and compare health plans. An exchange that instead offered a plan with rates slightly higher than Medicare but below current private plan rates would save nearly $800 billion over one with only private options, according to the Commonwealth Fund's analysis. "Offering a public plan choice and the design of this choice makes a difference in the pace of change," said Cathy Schoen, the group's senior vice president. Whether Democrats' plan to revamp the U.S. health care system and provide coverage to the roughly 46 million uninsured Americans includes a government-run insurance plan is a major sticking point as Congress finalizes its proposal. Supporters say such an option would offer Americans an affordable alternative. Most people with health insurance in the United Stated get it through their employer or the government. But those who do not have coverage through work and do not qualify for Medicare or the Medicare program for the poor can face a tough time buying a policy. The Commonwealth fund echoed those sentiments, saying private plans could lower premiums as more people seek insurance and that lower administrative costs with the government-run options may force private plans to streamline. "It would provide a strong incentive for private plans to innovate and compete," Schoen told reporters. Opponents say a cheaper, government plan will make it impossible for private plans to compete and may drive some out of business. It could also encourage employers to drop coverage and make employees buy a government-backed plan, they say. Overall, an exchange with a Medicare-like plan will save nearly $3 trillion through 2020, saving consumers up to $2,200 per household, Commonwealth found. About $2 trillion of that would come after about five to six years, it said. In comparison, an exchange including a government plan with higher rates would save $1.97 trillion and a private plan-only exchange would save almost $1.2 trillion. Both options would save a household $1,600. Still, an exchange won't keep health costs from rising, the report added. The increase in federal budget costs from 2010 to 2020 with the Medicare-like public plan would be $112 billion, it found. That is compared to $232 billion under the public plan with somewhat higher rates and $360 billion under a private plan-only exchange. All three options would help insure nearly all Americans, it said, with the number of uninsured dropping to about 4 million people by 2012. The group's analysis assumed other changes would also be made to the U.S. healthcare market. These include payment reforms to the Medicare program, an expansion of existing government coverage and new regulations that would require insurers to cover a wider range of consumers. Hospitals and doctors would also see their revenues grow with any of the three exchanges but at a slower rate, the report said. Thank You !
06/29/2009
The Commonwealth Fund showed what Obama’s advisers know, that a public plan competing with the private plans ? even if it pays more than Medicare does ? saves the nation trillions and most Americans get health insurance.
Post a Comment: Please be civil, brief and relevant.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. All comments are moderated. Marketplace reserves the right to edit any comments on this site and to read them on the air if they are extra-interesting. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting.
You must be 13 or over to submit information to American Public Media. The information entered into this form will not be used to send unsolicited email and will not be sold to a third party. For more information see Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.