HR 3962 Health-Care Bill (PDF file)

Another "shovel ready" component of the Stimulus/Bailout package

http://ow.ly/yNAA

Health Bill Includes $507 Billion in New Taxes and Fees

Finance Committee Health Bill Includes $507 Billion in New Taxes and Fees
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
By Matt Cover
http://ow.ly/ugCn
MP3 http://ow.ly/ugGc


In this Sept. 29, 2009 file photo, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, of Nev., right, speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., left, and newly-named Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, center, listen. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)
(CNSNews.com) – The health-care bill that the Senate Finance Committee will vote on today will cost a total of $829 billion over 10 years, with $507 billion of that cost being covered by new federal taxes and fees, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

On Oct. 7, the CBO released a report on the budget impact of the “chairman’s mark” summary of the bill that the Finance Committee is set to vote on today. Based on the document it was given, the CBO found that the bill would reduce the federal budget deficit by $81 billion over 10 years. That estimate was based on the calculation that, if enacted, the bill would bring in $480 billion in new tax revenues and $27 billion in fees.

These new taxes and fees include:

-- $201 billion in new taxes on high-premium health care plans.

-- $83 billion in new taxes paid by workers who will receive less employer-sponsored coverage or lose that coverage altogether but will be compensated with higher wages or monetary benefits, which are taxable.

-- $23 billion in penalty fees paid by employers who do not comply with the federal insurance mandate.

-- $4 billion in penalty fees paid by individuals who don’t have health insurance.

-- $16 billion in new income and Medicare payroll tax revenue due to changes in Medicare.

-- $180 billion in other tax revenues items calculated by the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT).

According to the JCT, this $180 billion in new taxes would include: A new tax on prescription drug makers that would account for $22.2 billion over 10 years; a new tax on medical device manufacturers that would bring in $38.6 billion; and a new annual tax on insurance companies would net the government $60.4 billion.

Also, a provision that raises the threshold at which medical expenses become tax deductible, from 7.5 percent of income to 10 percent of income, would reportedly yield the government $15.2 billion in new revenue from sick and disabled Americans with high out-of-pocket medical costs.

It would also include $5.4 billion derived from changing the definition of a deductible medical expense for health savings accounts; $14.6 billion from limiting to $2,500 the tax-deductible amount in flexible spending arrangements between employers and employees; $17.1 billion in revenue from expanded requirements (and potential penalties) on corporate reporting of taxable payments to other parties; and $5.4 billion from sponsors of Medicare Part D plans who are no longer able to deduct subsidies paid by the government to those plans.

The overall bill would cost $829 billion, according to the CBO, the cost of which apparently would be covered by a combination of savings, taxes, and penalties. The CBO said that the Baucus bill (currently in summary form, not final legislative language) would probably achieve $404 billion in spending cuts and other savings, largely through cuts to Medicare payments to physicians and to the Medicare Advantage insurance programs. The costs would come primarily from generous federal health insurance subsidies and entitlement expansions.

A letter to AARP Executive Director, Mr. Rand

RE: AARP Executive Director Mr. Rand

Dear Mr. Rand,
Recently you sent us a letter encouraging us to renew our lapsed membership in AARP by the requested date. While we have proudly maintained our membership for several years and have long admired the AARP goals and principles, regrettably, we can no longer endorse it's abdication of our values. Your letter specifically stated that we can count on AARP to speak up for our rights, yet the voice we hear is not ours. Your offer of being kept up to date on important issues through DIVIDED WE FAIL presents neither an impartial view nor the one we have come to embrace. We do believe that when two parties agree all the time on everything presented to them, one is probably not necessary. But, when the opinions and long term goals are diametrically opposed, the divorce is imminent. This is the philosophy which spawned our 200 years of government.

Once upon a time, we looked forward to being part of the senior demographic. We also looked to AARP to provide certain benefits and give our voice a power we could not possibly hope to achieve on our own. AARP gave us a sense of belonging which we no longer enjoy. The Socialist politics practiced by the Obama administration and empowered by AARP serves only to raise the blood pressure my medical insurance strives to contain. Clearly a conflict of interest there!

We do not understand the AARP posture, feel greatly betrayed by the guiding forces whom we expected to map out our senior years and leave your ranks with a great sense of regret. We mitigate that disappointment with the relief of knowing that we are not contributing to the problem anymore by renewing our membership. There are numerous other organizations which offer discounts without threatening our way of life or offending our sensibilities.

This Presidential Administration scares the living daylights out of us. Not just for ourselves, but for our proud and bloodstained heritage, but even more importantly for our children and grandchildren. Washington has rendered Soylent Green a prophetic cautionary tale rather than a nonfiction scare tactic. I have never in my life endorsed any militant or radical groups, yet now I find myself listening to them. I don't have to agree with them to appreciate the fear which birthed their existence. Their borderline insanity presents little more than a balance to the voice of the Socialist mindset in power. Perhaps I became American by a great stroke of luck in some cosmic uterine lottery, but in my adulthood I CHOOSE to embrace it and nurture the freedoms it represents as well as the responsibilities it requires.

Your website generously offers us the opportunity to receive all communication in Spanish. ARE YOU KIDDING??? Someone has broken into our 'house', invaded our home without our invitation or consent. The President has insisted we keep the perpetrator in comfort and learn their language so we can communicate our reluctant welcome to them.
I DON'T choose to welcome them. I DON'T choose to support them. I DON'T choose to educate them. I DON'T choose to medicate them, pay for their food or clothing.
American home invaders get arrested. Please explain to me why foreign lawbreakers can enjoy privileges on American soil that Americans do not get? Why do some immigrants have to processed to be welcomed and others only have to break & enter to be welcomed?

We travel for a living. Walt hauls horses all over this great country, averaging over 10,000 miles a month when he is out there. He meets more people than a politician on caffeine overdose. Of all the many good folks he enjoyed on this last 10,000 miles, this trip yielded only ONE supporter of the current administration. One of us is out of touch with mainstream America. Since our poll is conducted without funding, I have more faith in it than one which is power driven.

We have decided to forward this to everyone on our mailing list, and will encourage them to do the same. With several hundred in my address book, I have every faith that the eventual exponential factor will make a credible statement to you.

I am MAD as hell, and I'm NOT going to take it anymore!