Tax Reform ATR believes that all consumed income should be taxed one time, at one low and flat rate. Link
Jim Pendergraph Supports $2 Trillion Tax Hike http://t.co/LF6ieJuZ
taxreformer
Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley: Barack Obama, Jr. http://t.co/lzrcRtSj
taxreformer
EPA's War on Fossil Fuels http://t.co/gzORlViU
taxreformer
Less Waste, More Transparency in Government Broadband Loans http://t.co/RrWuq3O3
taxreformer
Check out @Union_Facts’ new #Crony2012 campaign exposing President Obama’s corrupt relationship with Big Labor http://t.co/5aDnKJUQ
taxreformer
Tom Cross's Hope for Change to Obamacare http://t.co/Isu5I7kK
taxreformer
RT @ChrisPrandoni: My new column exposing Obama's plan to kill coal via @townhallcom http://t.co/2fEqWUdU via
ChrisPrandoni
Blog: Tom Cross's hope for change to Obamacare - http://t.co/g6OFzp73 #atr ^
joshuaculling
ATR Urges North Carolina Legislators to Reject Anti-Free Enterprise Protectionism http://t.co/RIg4ejSB
taxreformer
ATR Releases 2012 List of State Taxpayer Protection Pledge Signers for May 22 Primaries http://t.co/maSodrTt
taxreformer
More and more evidence continues to flow in that demonstrates just how bad the Administration's plans for government run healthcare will be for Americans.
Writing in today's Washington Post, Martin Feldstein, a professor of economics at Harvard University, president emeritus of the nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research, and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers from 1982 to 1984, writes that the Administration plan could "have the unintended consequence of raising health insurance premiums and causing a decline in the number of people with insurance":
A key feature of the House and Senate health bills would prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to anyone with preexisting conditions. The new coverage would start immediately, and the premium could not reflect the individual's health condition. This well-intentioned feature would provide a strong incentive for someone who is healthy to drop his or her health insurance, saving the substantial premium costs. After all, if serious illness hit this person or a family member, he could immediately obtain coverage. As healthy individuals decline coverage in this way, insurance companies would come to have a sicker population. The higher cost of insuring that group would force insurers to raise their premiums. (Separate accident policies might develop to deal with the risk of high-cost care after accidents when there is insufficient time to buy insurance.)
The higher premium level would cause others who are currently insured to drop coverage, pushing premiums even higher. The result would be a spiral of rising premiums and shrinking numbers of insured.
He goes on to explain how the taxes levied on people who do not purchase insurance will provide insufficient incentive to prevent this from occuring, and how ultimatly this will evolve to the dreaded "public option" , irrespective of whether it is in the initial bill or not, accompanied with higher taxes, higher spending, and worse coverage for all.