How Health Reform Could Increase Your State/Local Taxes
Posted by Joe Rivett on 09.30.2009
If Baucus' bill covers 30 million more Americans many of which will be covered by expanding Medicaid, won't States and Local Municipalities (you) be forced to pick up the tab?
The Wall Street Journal ran an excellent Op-Ed concerning the Medicaid provision in Max Baucus' health care bill. I refuse to call it Obamacare considering he hasn't drawn a line in the sand or offered a bill. Anyway, the Baucus bill increases the Medicaid eligibility dramatically to about $30,000 for a family of four.
Now you are probably wondering how this impacts you if you make more than 30,000 in a family of four. Well, Medicaid is covered half by the federal government and half by the state government. Therefore, if Medicaid is expanded, state spending will likely have to increase and unlike the Federal government, State governments have to balance a budget. In some states such as my own, local governments have to chip into the Medicaid system which means your property taxes. On average, about 17% of State budget's go toward Medicaid often beating out education spending.
To get Medicaid, you have to either be really sick, pregnant, or really poor. According to citizen.org 60 percent of poor people aren't poor enough to acquire Medicaid. By expanding eligibility to millions more, state budgets could face serious shortfalls.
If this plan is going to be passed, hopefully states will increase co-payments and/or fees since now it will not longer be for the very poor/disabled.
In addition, if insurance companies have to take on the very sick, it could increase costs on everyone with private insurance on top of us covering more Medicaid recipients. It seems to me like the Baucus bill doesn't really do much to solve the health care crisis. I'm not a rigid ideological guy as I prefer pragmatism. I either want big government or no government but this appears to be half-assed government.
Now don't get all upset at this news. There have been 564 amendments proposed and the Washington Post is simply calling the bill a "rough draft." The Republicans aren't helping the debate as they are worried about Medicare cuts despite the fact Medicare is socialized medicine. Yes, they want to save socialized medicine! It looks like the real debate is going to come down between the Democrats vs. the Democrats vs. Max Baucus.
Any kind of healthcare legislation is going to cost the average US citizen more money. You can be for it or against it, but you'd have to be a fool, or one of the "really poor", to think you won't end up paying more one way or another. Fed, state, local, insurance company, employer - someone is going to pass their cost on to you.
Posted By: Guest#4513 (Guest) on September 29, 2009 at 11:47 PM
Medicare is now an entrenched entitlement. No amount of philosophical objection to "socialized medicine" can change the fact that a portion of the American public is dependent on it, despite its many financial and administrative problems. You're not shining a spotlight on hypocrisy, nor being particularly clever by pointing out that Republicans are forced to defend a socialized medical program. If anything, this fact only serves to underscore precisely why we don't want more socialized medicine, as it creates another entitlement that can seemingly never be reformed, let alone done away with entirely.
Posted By: IronyNOW (Guest) on September 29, 2009 at 11:59 PM
Pay money for an illegal war or pay money for better healthcare. I know which sounds better.
Posted By: Finn (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 10:23 AM
"illegal war" that Liberals have funded time and again- including your boy Obama.
An "illegal war" that was passed legally through Congress.
Saem old blame Bush shit, Dems have the majority. If they had a fucking plan that worked this would already have been a closed deal.
Stop blaming Bush, stop blaming Republicans.
Obama has yet to even close GITMO- the bill he signed 9 months ago...the first day in office.
By this time in Bush's first term we have been attacked and are fighting the War on Terror- he got his shit together, and he never blamed Clinton.
What's Obama's excuse? What are the Dems using as an excuse?
Stop bringing up "illegal" wars...the fact is that Obama does not have a plan that anyone likes including his own people.
Posted By: Grant Muioc (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Grant,
Way to put entire paragraphs into Finn's mouth. All he had to say is 'illegal war' and you lump into an amorphous blob of 'Liberals' and 'Dems' and 'your boy Obama', etc. Calm down man.
PS - the Internet is a scary place, but don't be afraid to use your real name here. I won't steal your life, scout's honor.
Posted By: Lester Huiotgh (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 01:40 PM
"By this time in Bush's first term we have been attacked and are fighting the War on Terror- he got his shit together, and he never blamed Clinton."
Um, yeah...Bush and his administration did blame Clinton. In fact, they blamed him for both being unable to sufficiently fight terrorists and the recession that started under Bush.
Posted By: Guest#7634 (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 02:04 PM
You mean, if the Guvment pays fo' healthcare, then my taxes will go up?
Say it ain't so Joe.
Posted By: demOcratic (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 03:55 PM
Grant Muioc (The Spook)...
I believe you misunderstood what Finn was stating. All he was saying is that we can "afford" (and continue to spend money) to pay for a war in Iraq that wasn't even supposed to had happen, but yet, we can't spend the same amount of money to take care of our people here in this great country of yours, The U.S.of A.
Posted By: Independent4Obama (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 04:31 PM
I don't get how this is news. NO ONE buys that the health care reform bills before congress will be budget neutral. That means raising taxes.
Now i think I might be in he small minority of Americans who think that this plan is actually a good enough idea (ignoring how we're going to pay for it) that I'd be willing to have my taxes raised a little bit to fund it.
Posted By: Jlevysan (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 04:56 PM
'Lester',
Notice how 95% of commenters here don't use full names, let alone their real names?
Posted By: Scotty H (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 07:17 PM
I'm one of millions of people who don't have health care. I just can't afford it. All these private insurance companies should be exterminated. How can you put such a high price tag on health? On life? The US is no longer a country. It's a huge corporation now, caring more about money than the people forking it over. I would gladly pay extra on taxes just so I could walk into any hospital and receive the care I need. Anybody that doesn't think that's a great idea is an idiot. Every other big country takes care of its citizens. They pay taxes, get health care and live comfortably. Why is that so hard for us? You might bring up those countries have waiting lists. Last I checked, the US has waiting lists too... unless you're part of the upper class. Not all of us are fortunate enough to be born into a rich bloodline or smart enough to create a billion dollar corporation. Everybody needs health care. Until the powers that be realize that they have to open up the wallet, it isn't going to happen.
Posted By: Chris Stone (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 07:50 PM
as soon as anyone throws out the phrase "illegal war" I categorize them as an ideological idiot. And then to present it as though it's an either/or situation is even more ridiculous.
Posted By: Guest#6434 (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 09:15 PM
Another point I'd like to add is that it is obvious that covering people will cost more money. However, I'd rather have my money spent differently than changing the definition of Medicaid to include working poor and lower middle class. The problem with Medicaid is that states use it too much b/c they know the feds have to chip in half.
Posted By: Joe Rivett (Registered) on September 30, 2009 at 10:18 PM
Chris Stone (Guest) - being from Canada, we all gain equal access regardless of income BUT the tone of your comment is a little disturbing. Is it just health care that you believe the rich should pay for since you can't. Should that also include your wages? Since you don't make as much as a rich guy, shouldn't he pay to double your income? Does that also include your vehicle? Should the rich guy pay for you to drive a nice car?
It should be made affordable for all people, not just a socialist mantra of rich people are evil and you, not being rich, are good.
It would simply end up that no one would be rich, everyone would be poor, and then where would you be? There would be no one to pay for your health care.
Posted By: Mikel (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 11:15 PM
What if you already are covered and really can not afford more taxes at this point due to budgets, child care, bills, etc.
I know the left wants to be everything to everyone, but what about the rest of us?
Cap and trade could cost every family $1200 a year. Were do I come up with this money?
When does it end? I am not poor, but I am not rich either. All health care and cap and trade does is make my life harder. I feel bad that people have financial problems due to health care issues. I really do.
I have a son with type 1 diabetes. Its not cheap. I have never thought it was other peoples jobs to handle his care financially. I know this comes accross as selfish, but I have nothing left to give other people. I am tapped out.
There has to be another way to solve global warming........excuse me, climate change. There has to be another way were normal americans are not saddled with more costs due to health care issues of others.
I am just a normal guy trying to get a little bit ahead........its getting harder. Is that change we are all supposed to believe in?
Posted By: John Galbraith (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 11:32 PM
Somebody call the Whaaaa-mbulance for Chris Stone. Or just give him a pacifier. Maybe it's not a matter of being born rich or smart. Maybe you just suck.
Posted By: Guest#666 (Guest) on September 30, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Well Chris, you'd probably be more able to afford it if the restrictions barring sales across state lines were repealed and state legislatures stopped telling insurance companies what they have to cover at a minimum.
Posted By: Chris Connolly (Guest) on October 01, 2009 at 03:27 PM
Of course people like Connolly and John never bother to really address the fundamental questions here: Why should people's health and well-being be a for-profit industry at all? Why should people living and dying come down to how much money someone can afford to pay an insurance company?
It never ceases to amaze me how much most people in this country don't even realize that healthcare shouldn't be an industry like any other. TVs you should have to pay for. Cars you should have to pay for. These are luxury items you WANT and are not required to live your life. Getting treatment for a terminal illness shouldn't cost money. Whether a person lives or dies shouldn't rest solely on their bank account balance. Sadly, years of capitalism have created a culture of me me me, and to hell with everyone else.
Who cares if a mother of 3 can't pay for chemo therapy and will surely die without it? That bitch should have worked harder and then she could have moved up in her job and made enough money to buy insurance. I'm not dying, so who cares. I pay enough money to the government already.
That's most Americans view in a nutshell. How sad.
Posted By: Michael D. (Guest) on October 02, 2009 at 04:20 PM
I am also one of the millions of people in this country without health insurance. The reason is two-fold. The first reason is that I can't afford health insurance. I barely make enough money from my job to pay my rent and utilities plus I'm going to school full-time. My work offers health insurance, but the bi-weekly deduction is too much for me. The second reason is that I had private insurance, but I experienced the evil side of insurance when I read the dreaded phrase, "denied because of a pre-existing condition." What I'm about to say is going to rub some people the wrong way, but it is time that we stop this "me me me" mentality, bear down, and come up with some real health care reform. Both sides have to stop with this pissing contest and realize that they are no bigger than the constituents that they serve. I am a smoker and I have not complained once when the price of cigs rose. If they have to tax cigarettes to help pay for reform then I'm all for it. You want real reform then you simplify it in these terms:
1. Illegal for insurance companies to deny any claim or insured person because of a pre-existing condition.
2. If someone loses their job then they can keep their work's insurance for a maximum of twenty-four months or until they qualify for other insurance.
3. If someone cannot afford private insurance then they can opt into a public health insurance plan that is funded by the government similiar to Medicare.
Posted By: Tobias (Guest) on October 03, 2009 at 10:58 PM
STAY CURRENT