- Daily Media Spotlight September 3, 2010
- Dina Titus Attack Ad on Joe Heck and the Taxpayer Protection Pledge is Thoroughly Misleading
-
120 Days to Go Until the
Largest Tax Hikes in History - Government vs. Private Control and "Balkanization" of the Internet
-
Get 'Em While They're Hot:
Medicine Cabinet Tax Hits in 120 Days
Friday, September 3, 2010
- Vote 'NO!' to Government Regulation of Privacy at The Economist
- FCC Stalls on Internet Regulation; Asks for More Comments
- Why was the Volcker Commission Constrained by Obama’s Tax Pledge, but not the Simpson-Bowles?
- Daily Media Spotlight September 2, 2010
- Harry Reid Looks to Resurrect RES During Lame-Duck
- Calculating the Cost of Government (CFA Site »)
Thursday, September 2, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight September 1, 2010
-
Obama Tax Commission Report:
Baby Step Toward IRS Tax Preparation - Dina Titus Launches False Attack Ad on Joe Heck and the Taxpayer Protection Pledge
- Indiana LaunchesTransparency Website (CFA Site »)
- Rally for Jobs Kicks Off Today in Texas
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 31, 2010
- Let us All Join in on the NOT so “Green Cause”
- California Bag Ban Bill Up for Vote Today
- Norquist to Gov. Pat Quinn: Pick a Flawed Income Tax Hike and Stick With It
- Phil Moffett Signs Taxpayer Protection Pledge in Kentucky Gubernatorial Race
- New Mexico Sets Trends in Transparency Websites (CFA Site »)
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
- Robert Gibbs’s Fuzzy Tax Hike Math
- Daily Media Spotlight August 30, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
- 2011 Could Be Ugly for Nevada Taxpayers
- Lame Duck Governor Ed Rendell Not Going Gently Into That Good Night – New Call for Higher Taxes
- Happy Cost of Government Day, California
- Bay Staters Spent 239 Days Paying for Government Burdens in 2010 (CFA Site »)
- Washington Welcomes Cost of Government Day (CFA Site »)
Friday, August 27, 2010
- Spill Commission Should Lift Moratorium Which Has Cost Gulf Residents 12,000 Jobs and $2.1 Billion
- Daily Media Spotlight August 26, 2010
- Why is Dan Onorato Knowingly Misleading Pennsylvania Voters?
- Unions plan on spending big this election cycle
- Utah Tobacco Sellers Feeling the Impact of Tax Hikes
Thursday, August 26, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 25, 2010
- WI Democrats Launch “Blatantly False” Attack on Sean Duffy
- Unions plan on spending big this election cycle (AWF Site »)
- Philly's New Blog Tax May Foreshadow Other eTaxes
- BNA: For 14 States, Existing Tax Code Leaves Room for Etax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Philly's $300 Blogger Tax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Cost of Government Day Arrives in the Commonwealth
- Pennsylvania Finally Celebrates Cost of Government Day
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
- California Budget Proposal Advocates eTax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Daily Media Spotlight August 24, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 23, 2010
- Government Workers' Pensions are Underfunded by $3 Trillion
Monday, August 23, 2010
- Fourteen Ways to Reduce Government Spending
Friday, August 20, 2010
State of the Union Myth/Fact:
Government-Run Healthcare
From Ryan Ellis on Thursday, January 28, 2010 3:42 PM
MYTH: “[My health plan] would give small businesses and uninsured Americans a chance to choose an affordable health care plan in a competitive market.”
FACT: The Obama-Reid-Pelosi plan would actually increase health premium costs for the uninsured. The average individual health insurance premium today is $2985 for singles and $6328 for families. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the average premium will increase to $5800 for singles and $15,200 for families under the Obama plan by 2016. This is 10 to 13 percent higher than they would be under current law. Only those individuals earning less than about $40,000 and families earning less than about $85,000 would receive any tax or spending benefits to even partially-offset this increased cost. Those earning more than this get no help whatsoever.
For small businesses (“small group plans”), today’s average premium is $4155 for singles and $10,956 for families. Under the Obama-Reid-Pelosi plan, this increases to $7800 for singles and $19,200 for families by 2016, a 1-2 percent increase over current law. Only about 12 percent of people receiving coverage from their small business employer would benefit from the small business health tax credit.
MYTH: “[My plan] would require every insurance plan to cover preventive care.”
FACT: Under current law, someone can’t wait until they are sick and then sign up for health insurance. That’s called “gaming the system.” Insurance only works if healthy people are paying premiums each month, so that when you get sick or go to the doctor, money is there for you. If healthy people can wait to buy coverage, the entire insurance model falls apart very quickly. Put simply, “guaranteed issue” would be the death of insurance.
MYTH: “Our approach would preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan.”
FACT: The Obama-Reid-Pelosi plan taxes your current health insurance, if it’s deemed to be a “Cadillac plan.” It also puts in place minimum coverage requirements in order to remain “qualifying,” which probably will alter your plan. It probably will make it impossible to design health insurance plans which are HSA-compatible. Clearly, you simply can’t keep your current plan under this bill.
MYTH: “According to the Congressional Budget Office – the independent organization that both parties have cited as the official scorekeeper for Congress – our approach would bring down the deficit by as much as $1 trillion over the next two decades.”
FACT: According to CBO, these cost estimates only pan out if Congress is willing to cut Medicare provider reimbursements, something everyone knows will never happen. Budget savings based on phony, never-going-to-happen spending cuts are bogus. This creates an unfunded liability in the program.
MYTH: “I know that with all the lobbying and horse-trading, this process left most Americans wondering what's in it for them.”
FACT: When the American people don’t want a massive plan of this size, margins can get a little tight on Capitol Hill. That’s why Obama-Reid-Pelosi had to buy off members with the Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Kickback, the Cadillac Compromise, and untold other backroom, closed-door deals. Back in the campaign, candidate Obama said he would put negotiations on C-SPAN so this could not happen.
MYTH: “There's a reason why many doctors, nurses, and health care experts who know our system best consider this approach a vast improvement over the status quo.”
FACT: One word: money. The American Medical Association, nursing groups, hospitals, and others are receiving billions in taxpayer subsidies under this bill.
MYTH: “If anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know.”
FACT: It’s worth pointing out that even President Obama’s own plan will increase premiums, increase the deficit (at least in the real world) even while raising taxes, cover only some of the uninsured (theoretically), cut Medicare, and drive insurance companies totally out of business. So one might first turn the question back on him.
Can President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and/or Leader Reid use the Internet? Can their staffs? It appears not, since this is a common refrain easily refuted. The fact is, there are dozens of good ideas and several comprehensive plans which have been proposed. The House Republicans have even aggregated all of them. Their list doesn’t include the DeMint plan, nor does it include the comprehensive “American Roadmap” government reform plan (including healthcare) of Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.)














Comments
[i]The Obama-Reid-Pelosi plan would actually increase health premium costs for the uninsured.[/i] Charitably, this lacks precision. The uninsured don't pay premium costs, by definition. They are, after all, uninsured. What ATR seems to mean here are people in non-group policies. According to the CBO, not only do these policies gain considerably in their offerings (compared to current non-group policies that many of us can probably agree are very weak, including large deductibles, out-of-pocket limits and low lifetime caps), but 57% of the people who would be in these plans also receive a subsidy, and the subsidy offers 56-59% off those premiums, on average.
>> Todd Stauffer Friday, January 29, 2010 11:04 AM Report Comment
Plus, ATR has a bit of an Apples and Oranges problem in the analysis. The apple is $2985 (~$250 per month), which is supposed to be the CURRENT average premium offered to an individual for an individual policy (one of those non-Cadillac plans complete with lifetime caps, coverage gaps and rescission), according to ATR, and the CBO sees premiums for those crappy plans going up about $5500 -- the orange -- under current law (the percentage is mentioned but in passing.) So, $5800 under the proposed reform is 10-12% higher due to the increased benefits and LAW that would require coverage, remove caps and standardize benefits. And 57% of the 17% of the population covered under these plans would received a subsidy.
>> Todd Stauffer Friday, January 29, 2010 11:11 AM Report Comment
As for the Republican plan and Boehner's claim that it meets the criteria set out by the President in the SOTU address: http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/201001280005 http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=2061 What was that about using the Internet, again? :-)
>> Todd Stauffer Friday, January 29, 2010 11:19 AM Report Comment
Todd: Under the plan, there would be a legal obligation to purchase health insurance. The baseline is comparing what the average premium amount would be in the individual market with and without the "reform." The simple fact is that the "reform" would increase premiums by 10-13 percent over current law in 2016. Secondly, you claim that plans with higher deductibles, higher out of pocket limits, etc. are "bad." I call them "HSA-qualified." I (and all of ATR) have had one of these for several years. HSA plans save 33% in premium costs compared to a traditional plan. This money is then available to save in HSAs. This freedom to choose a rational plan would be denied to me under Obamacare, for separate reasons.
>> Ryan Ellis Friday, January 29, 2010 11:35 AM Report Comment