Pelosi: Obama is committed to unpopular "Cadillac Tax"

[Bluebear]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi just returned to the Capitol from a health care meeting at the White House. Walking toward her office, I asked her whether the Senate bill's "Cadillac tax" on high-end health care plans, which both the Senate and White House are pushing, would be a hard sell in the House.

"It's not a very popular initiative in the House or in the public," she said. "It's something the President is committed to, and we'll see how it works out."

In case that's not clear, Mr. President.


http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/pelosi-obama-committed-to-unpopular-excise-tax.php

[SoCalDem]

1. All they need to do , is to tweak it a liitle & it will be fine

Make it taxable for families with adjusted gross incomes of over $100K a year..not the GROSS income.. the adjusted gross.. that would exempt most rank & file workers, but would catch the boss-class & above..

[dkf]

2. It won't show up on your taxes. It will increase your premiums same way a sales tax increases costs

[SoCalDem]

4. surely they could change it...

if they "wanted" to:)

[dkf]

11. I guess they could credit it back in your tax return.

Penalty for those who don't have insurance credit for those who pay Cadillac tax making under 250k. Blech.

[doc03]

17. From what I understand it will increase the premiums employers

pay giving them yet another reason to cut workers benefits.

[dkf]

30. Just the employer portion? Wouldn't it increase the entire cost so your portion also goes up?

[doc03]

39. I don't really know for sure. I thought there was a 40%

tax on employers premiums over $8000. It is just bad idea IMO, especially after the Unions helped get Obama elected. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

[dkf]

50. Pelosi says this is something Obama wants.

Sick.

[Capn Sunshine]

58. OR it could create a new product via demand that is priced right

under the Caddie tax. Only if you want to capture market share. And we all know how loathe the Healthcare companies are to try to capture market share.

Earl, how's that DU Health Insurance option comin'?

[OffWithTheirHeads]

3. Cause working folks just haven't had the shit beaten out of

them enough yet.

[ShortnFiery]

5. Hey, next they'll be coming for our retirements and social security. As long

as there are Middle Class monies to be moved up to the greedy assholes of the Upper 1%, they'll come after it. And our damn legislators, both parties, will help them GET IT ALL. :grr:

[doc03]

20. They already have, I retire this year and did some figuring

what taxes will cost me next year. Well because I get a small pension from my employer and I saved money in a 401k and an IRA I will have to pay taxes on 85% of my SS. Now another employee that drank up his paycheck and has no savings will pay zero tax on his SS.

[clear eye]

46. I'm going to be in the same situation in a couple of years.

I scrimped (truly) to contribute to a retirement plan, and now I'm massively penalized for it to spare the multi-millionaires and billionaires from having to pay real taxes that they wouldn't even feel. Paying less than the rest of us is just an entitlement for being rich in their minds. And I'm still hoping we can rescue the part of our party that wants to correct that, and don't go down like Labor in the UK, or be derailed like the NDP in Canada.

We really, truly have to enact the Fair Elections Now Act, http://www.fairelectionsnow.org/volunteer , and fight to get control of e-voting and e-counting, http://www.wheresthepaper.org/ & http://electiontransparencycoalition.org/about/ , so all chance of electing members of Congress who serve the people's interests won't be lost.

The soul of our party is at stake.

[doc03]

60. In 1984 during the Reagan Administration they

put a tax on SS for higher income retirees, those making $25000 single and $32000 married. Those incomes were never indexed for inflation so today if you are making $25000 single and $32000 for married couples you are considered rich. If $25-32000 were indexed for inflation you would probably have to be making at least double that in today's dollars. Ronald Reagan also started taxing Unemployment he said Unemployment was a paid vacation for workers.
:nuke:

[glitch]

90. Believe it. nt

[ProfessorGAC]

69. Grover, Is That You?

We have folks here on DU puking on themselves because of the deficits being run up to turn the economy around, but now we have folks like you are bitching about taxation.

I thought liberals were supposed to be willing to pay taxes to support the greater good.

Now, we have folks here, like you, sounding like Grover Norquist. You must be so proud to keep such wonderful company.
GAC

[Hello_Kitty]

76. Taxing the shit out of the middle class to avoid raising taxes slightly on the rich

Is not progressive. That's the whole point of this excise tax. The House plan taxes millionaires. The Senate plan taxes health plans. Which one do you think Grover would prefer if he had to pick one of them?

[ProfessorGAC]

110. I'm For Both

You are not. One of us willingly pays whatever taxes are needed. The other of us complains about taxes. One of us is, by definition, closer to a Grover Norquist than the other is. Hint: It's not me.
GAC

[Confusious]

6. Too bad he couldn't commit to a public option.....eom

[HopeHoops]

7. It is only unpopular with those few who can afford it and the idiot teabaggers who can't.

I would just like to see it applied to CONGRESS as well. They've got a Cadillac plan.

[laughingliberal]

33. No, it applies to some union workers who negotiated their contracts with these benefit plans

Most of them took the benefits in lieu of higher pay or better raises. Now, they get the lower pay and their benefits will be taxed. It also will not be long before premium costs rise to meet the level which will be taxed. This is why the unions are fighting it. Sort of like the AMT they have to fix every year. Originally designed to make sure the rich payed their share but never redefined and now has to be fixed every year to avoid hitting middle class workers. Same thing only no guarantees anyone will fix it to keep it off more and more workers as premiums rise.

I'm opposed to it and I neither have a cadillac plan nor am I an idiot teabagger.

[paulsby]

61. damn right.

i have one. we negotiated for it

[muriel_volestrangler]

65. The bill says the point at which the tax starts rises at COLA + 1% each year (nt)

[lastliberalintexas]

55. It's also going to hurt workers who have nice employers

who provide good benefits.

[FLDCVADem]

66. Not necessarily

It depends on the plan they choose. I'm a federal employee, but we have insurance for our family through my husband's employer. Better plan for less money and not even close to the "Cadillac" numbers for a family.

[Bluebear]

103. ya

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

8. Gee, didn't McCain want to tax health insurance benefits?

[laughingliberal]

34. Yes, he did. And candidate Obama was against it

Course we all know how much that meant, now.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

44. Ah, just like when Hillary was for mandates and candidate Obama was against them? Not myself

personally, but a lot of Democrats decided to vote for Obama in the primaries because of that difference in position.

[laughingliberal]

45. That would have been me

Health care reform has been my hot button issue for years. And his health care plan was definitely one of the reasons I supported him in the primary against Hillary.

[QC]

64. What ever happened to Candidate Obama, anyway?

He was really cool.

[JVS]

71. Yeah, bring him back!

[QC]

72. He had some very interesting ideas. n/t

[freddie mertz]

94. I wonder about that every day.

Does he really think we are ALL so stupid that we will forget what he promised us?

It's vexing.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

9. tax the insurance CEOs not the patients

[Xithras]

10. It's a backdoor tax on the states as well.

I heard it mentioned yesterday that the largest employee blocs who will be impacted by this are unionized state employees and teachers, because nationwide those union groups have been the most successful at negotiating good medical benefit packages. While the details vary based on how its implemented, the result will be dramatically increased costs for state governments and local school districts across the country (either through increased healthcare prices, or through employee demands for higher pay to compensate for the new taxes). Because most states and school districts don't have the funds for those pay increases at the moment, the result will either be more layoffs to free up the money, or an effective pay cut for those public employees.

[laughingliberal]

36. Yes, another group long targeted for extinction by Republicans-state workers and teachers nt

[flyarm]

73. +10,000...but don't let that little "fact" get in the way of the cheerleading squad around here! eom

[treestar]

12. Not popular with people who make huge salaries

[Xithras]

13. Yeah, like those overpaid DMV clerks, public school teachers, and firefighters.

Way to stick it to those rich bastards!

[OffWithTheirHeads]

14. Don't forget us limousine construction workers.

Caddilac limousine. We buy American!

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

18. +1000!!!!

[treestar]

52. The ones I know make good money

Way more than I do, anyway.

They have excellent benefit. They are not self employed like me and don't have to worry about making enough money to cover the bills to run the office/business every month. They don't have to pay for the health insurance out of pocket like we do.

To me, those bastards are indeed rich! Good salaries and benefits. It's hard to feel sorry for people who have it better than one does personally and the demands that I feel sorry for them are pretty hilarious.

[Bluebear]

53. teachers & firefighters are now "bastards" to you. Wow.

While elsewhere you write:

"I'll vote for whoever is best for the country, even if I personally don't get something or end up with a new problem. It's not about just me."




http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7402222&mesg_id=7407731

[Hello_Kitty]

79. The very notion of workers being paid and treated well offends treestar to his core.

Everyone should work for $1 a day. (Except him, of course.)

[lastliberalintexas]

56. The solution should be to raise you up

not bring others down. We all do better when we all do better.

[freddie mertz]

95. Yeah, that's it! SCREW all those unionized civil servant bastards!

Teachers, cops, firemen, who NEEDS those morons!

You really are a piece of work, treestar.

[rpannier]

105. I see you're a member of the club

Rising Tides?! Quick sink their boats!

[paulsby]

62. and cops! nt

[Bluebear]

25. Yeah those pesky teachers, bus drivers, airline workers, culinary employees...

pay concession after pay concession for years to keep their "Cadillac" health plans and now you have the nerve to call them "huge salary" earners. Shame on you.

[treestar]

54. WTF?

so the poor are supposed to feel sorry for people who have steady jobs with good benefits?

:wtf:

People who can't afford health insurance are supposed to say oh too bad, I shouldn't get health insurance at all if it will be inconvenient to some middle class people!

[lastliberalintexas]

57. Yes, the have nots are supposed to ally themselves with the have a littles

The working and middle class is not the enemy of the poor, the elite are. Refocus your energies where they can do the most good.

[Bluebear]

59. You are giving sage advice.

[Hello_Kitty]

81. Yeah, because god forbid we inconvenience the rich by raising their taxes a hair.

Seriously, treestar, :wtf: Do you really want to live in a country with a small upper class, no middle class, and the vast majority living in poverty? Because that's what you seem to support based on most of your posts here.

[ThomCat]

29. Those plans are usually Union health plans.

This is a union busting move. Obama is well know to be very anti-union.

By making any insurance plans "Cadillac plans" based only one what the plans cost, without any regard for what the person earns per year, the plan is doomed from the start to hit poor and working people harder. So only rich people will be able to get these better plans. Its is a way of segregating health insurance plans so that there are plans for poor people, and plans for rich people.

A 3rd problem with this is that the definition of a Cadillac plan isn't being indexed to inflation. So as costs rise, what used to be a higher priced plan might not be anymore. That same cost could be the baseline in a couple of years, effectively making every plan a Cadillac plan.

All of the many problems with this show an absolute disregard for the way costs rise, and the way costs hit poor people harder and differently than they hit richer people.

Obama is showing that he is not paying attention to poor people. He's only concerned about paying for healthcare by taxing consumers (us) rather than by taxing corporate profits. He is showing where his priorities and allegiances are, again. It's with helping the corporations, not us.

[Dr.Phool]

38. Obama and the DLC are gonna find out, real quick, how much they don't need unions.

Their money and their support.

As for the other bozo, I couldn't see his remark. For good reason.

[flyarm]

77. this is one lifelong Union member that will make them pay for this bullshit for years and years to

to come if they push this bullshit bill through!

count on that!!

and i always vote!

and have worked for the dem party for most of my adult life..and even been an elected dem!

I stand with my union and all unions in total solidarity!

oh and don't think for a minute that because Union leaders may support this shit..that the union members will!..that would be a huge mistake.

[MichiganVote]

100. Amen to that.

[iowasocialist]

108. What is your evidence for this?

Thomcat said: Obama is well know to be very anti-union.

What is your evidence for this, Thomcat?

[laughingliberal]

37. Oh, right. Those huge teachers' salaries. Why they're all looking at Gulfstreams now

When did union workers and the middle class become the new 'welfare queens' and why am I enduring this on a website allegedly promoting progressive policies?

[Bluebear]

48. 'why am I enduring this on a website allegedly promoting progressive policies'

Because it's Obama and if he said, they believe it, and that settles it.

[Hello_Kitty]

87. It's unbelievable what has happened to this place.

We used to make fun of people who made $50K a year who voted Republican because they thought they were rich. We used to think that supporting the middle class was a good thing. Now I'm seeing the kind of anti-middle class union busting rhetoric I'd expect from Steve Forbes.

[glitch]

92. When their party imploded they had to go somewhere.

Lucky us.

[freddie mertz]

96. And all of it coming from so-called Obama supporters.

With friends like these... mother of mercy!

[Tim01]

67. That would be the dwindling middle class.

Huge salaries.:eyes:

[flyarm]

75. or small salaries that gave up salaries to get good health care packages..

don't think for one flying second union members throughout this country will not make dems pay for this bullshit at the polls next year and for years and years to come.

I will be one of those union members (and will proudly in solidarity lead other union members) that will never vote or work for the dem party again!

The payback for this horseshit bill will be felt in the democratic party for decades!

[tomp]

80. nurses? nt

[kenny blankenship]

15. Which would be a very different matter if he were likewise committed to a STRONG public option

but he was not committed to any public option whatsoever. Only to insurance company giveaways and pharmaceutical industry sweetheart deals.

[FiveGoodMen]

16. Let's remember that next time someone claims that Obama was stymied while trying to do good

He's not on our side.

Those who still say otherwise need a cluebat.

[chimpymustgo]

21. +1. A cluebat upside the head.

[ima_sinnic]

23. +++1

just realized you said basically the same thing I did a little downthread, though less sarcastically than I.

[FiveGoodMen]

Yeah. I guess I didn't read to the end before posting.

We did pretty much say the same thing.

:fistbump:

[ima_sinnic]

32. no--you posted before I did

but it's such an obvious point, we didn't even need to be "great minds" to think alike on that one :D

:toast:

[Bluebear]

49. the more said, the better!

:)

[Nikki Stone1]

19. She's being forced to accept the Senate version.

We knew this was going to happen. Any of the decent things the House wanted to add (and there were damned few of them) will be cut out. This must be what the White House wants. I don't see Rahm going there to argue for anything decent.

[ima_sinnic]

22. gee, I thought Obama "couldn't do anything," it was all "up to Congress"

don't we know how laws are made?
every 5th-grader knows that Congress makes laws, and the president is, well, er, a helpless nobody who is only a victim of "obstructionists" like Lieberman and Nelson like the rest of us nobodies, no matter how hard he wants something to pass. He has no say at all in law-making, so who does he think he is here, anyway?

[freddie mertz]

97. These are the death-agonies of the excuse machine.

As we get closer to the big "reveal," expect the hysteria and self-contradiction to increase.

[thereismore]

24. FINALLY Obama commits to something! How refreshing...

I am sick of this shit.

[ljm2002]

26. "If you like what you have, you can keep it."

Oh reeaallly, Mr. President?

I seem to recall that slogan being one of the big selling points that President Obama used when he started the ball rolling on this so-called health care overhaul.

Way to go.

[freddie mertz]

98. Add that one to the list. It's a long one. Pinocchio comes to mind.

These are very sad days.

[bvar22]

27. Brand Obama....

.....what a marketing scam this turned out to be.


"I am not a crook."

"I did not have sex with that woman."

"I did not campaign on a Public Option."

[Bluebear]

28. But he was sexay sexay in his swimsuit, you know,

Don't be such a haturr. :silly:

[backscatter712]

31. Let me put my flameproof undies on.

The concept of the Cadillac Tax is not a bad one - the point behind structuring the tax the way this way is cost control. Set the threshold at the right level, and health insurers will be motivated to price most of their plans below where the tax kicks in, thus putting some downward price pressure on insurers.

The problem is where to set the threshold. Set it too low, and the middle-class gets burned, and the insurers won't bother to lower their prices if they don't want to push their expenses and profits below the threshold. Set it too high, and the tax won't bring in enough revenue to pay the bills, and the deficit will go up. Ideally, it'd be set at a point where the insurers will be motivated to lower their premiums to keep the total costs below the threshold, thus having bragging rights about helping customers save money. But it would get the actual Cadillac plans - the high-priced executive health care plans that give unlimited health care, are insanely expensive, but don't really improve health care outcomes for all the money spent.

I wouldn't mind an exemption in the tax for unions, so their members don't get burned - unions have taken high-priced health care plans for workers instead of pay raises as a way of increasing total compensation, so they shouldn't be punished for that. That and an exemption for workers in high-risk professions like longshoremen (IIRC, that exemption was already in the bill.)

I'd say wait and see on how the Cadillac tax negotiations go. As long as the threshold where the tax kicks in isn't too low, and accommodations are put in place for unions and other workers that would otherwise be too adversely affected, this tax actually could work, and the cost control built into this tax could be helpful.

[laughingliberal]

40. Here's a better concept. Tax the people who got all the tax breaks for 30 years

Yeah, let's trust the health insurance companies to price their products to save us taxes. As if they give a shit if we get taxed on their overpriced crap.

[Tim01]

68. The insurance companies will just raise rates to cover expenses.

I think it would be a lot more foolproof to just raise taxes on really rich people. Forget this complicated malleable stuff.


You make over $1 million/year? You can get by on a bit less.

[Captain Hilts]

70. Eliminating the anti-trust exemption would introduce some cost competition and control. nt

[Hello_Kitty]

83. But if they exempt union workers and others it won't raise enough revenue.

This thing is supposed to raise around $250 billion. Of course, the House plan to tax millionaires would raise a lot more but we can't do that now, can we? :sarcasm:

[IndianaGreen]

35. It is really a 'Chevy Tax' that will harm the middle class

at a time in which they are barely surviving.

[laughingliberal]

41. +1000 nt

[MichiganVote]

42. I will wait for the details. But if this is another stick it to the middle class I'm done w/the

Democratic party and Obama and anyone else who votes for this. Its a deal breaker for me.

[Puglover]

86. I retired from Northwest Airlines in Oct.

My salary at retirement was what I was making in 1989 after pay cuts so we could keep our health benefits. IF they pass this crappy HCR AND tax my "cadillac" insurance. (Doe's this term remind anyone of Cadillac Welfare Moms?) I am done as well.

Not that I care enough to take them off ignore but I wonder how the cheerleaders are spinning this one.

[Hello_Kitty]

88. The cheerleaders are claiming that people who oppose this tax

Are selfish and don't care about "the poor". What else would they be saying? They've got nothing but insults and guilt trips at this point.

[MichiganVote]

101. And that's more bullshit too. I have paid taxes to help the poor, raised $ and other countless acts.

What about those of us who do work, who do contribute and are fucking going broke with this bullshit lobby hugging congress?

[MichiganVote]

99. Yes it has the unhappy stench of Reagan and his BS. This and Afghanistan--stupid.

[laughingliberal]

43. Hear, hear for Nancy! Rec for honesty. nt

[Nikki Stone1]

47. "It's something the President is committed to"--she talking about the tax here.

That's honest, I guess.

[laughingliberal]

51. I think so. I'm sure the House will get rolled on this, too but at least she got a lick in nt

[coti]

63. And when THIS President makes a commitment....

you know he's following through on it.

His word is his bond.

[AzDar]

74. THIS he'll stand up for. The Public Option... not so much.

:puke:

[backscatter712]

78. I think the Cadillac Tax can work, with some tweaks.

Personally, I'd make sure the threshold before the tax kicked in was high enough that most people were unaffected (I think it's already set that way.)

I'd also give some exemptions - raise the threshold for older people, since they're still going to be paying some higher premiums, and cut breaks for union-negotiated plans and plans for people in high-risk professions.

There is economic justification for the Cadillac tax - it is engineered to encourage insurers to lower their premiums to keep them under the threshold, and it's designed to punish the really high-priced plans that overuse medical resources. It's one of those things designed to bend the cost curve down, and engineered correctly, it can work.

I know, let me get dressed before you flame me...

[laughingliberal]

84. It is NOT already set that way

The premium rates that are targeted for this tax are common among people over 50 for pretty standard coverage. This BS of limiting use of medical resources by limiting people's coverage is the same 'ownership society' crap that Bush was selling. Overuse of resources is more the responsibility of the providers. It has been shown the over ordering of tests, etc...is generally due to physicians who are invested in diagnostic centers and hospitals who are reimbursed by how much they do and not how effectively they work.

There is just no end to variations on the 'welfare queen' myth

[Hello_Kitty]

89. Thank you!

Of all the defenses of this indefensible plan the "it'll make people be more discriminating health care consumers" is the most egregious. Pushing more co-pays and deductibles on people will not stop the provider abuse. It will cause people to delay or avoid care, which will only increase costs in the future.

[MichiganVote]

102. Honey the only thing they'll tweak is the stick they put up your arse'.

[flyarm]

104. + a million!!!..so correct!!!!!!!!! thanks..eom

[Tailormyst]

82. He sure does commit to the strangest shit

This he digs his heels in on, but a public option... nah. He's not even trying to hide who's fucking side he is on anymore.

[laughingliberal]

85. That is the part that is really scary these days.

Why is it they don't even try to hide it, now. Not even a bone to try to fool us, anymore. Is it because we are already a failed state and they are making the last grab for every little bit we have left before they bail?

[glitch]

93. RFKjr likened the way Republicans were behaving to having a fire sale of our nation's resources

before leaving the country. Evidently that particular job is post-partisan.

They have to loot everything to keep the wall street casino inflated, in hopes that it will inevitably collapse on someone elses watch, if that is at all possible. The health insurance secter is 1/6th the nation's economy and a huge part of wall street, including a whole lot of institutional funds (like pensions) and they are demanding their own bailout and they are getting it.

Homegrown economic terrorism. A protection racket, with the new sheriff in town either incompetent or complicit in dealing with them. His intelligence, rhetoric and the company he keeps lead me to suspect complicit.

I would love to be wrong, a soul is a terrible thing to see sold.

[Marr]

109. I think it's because we're in this stage where big business owns

the government, but hasn't yet cannibalized the system quite enough to make the population truly angry. Or maybe they have, but the political system is lagging a few cycles behind.

This fraud deserves to be a one term president, that's all I know. Maybe if we make it absolutely clear that servicing big business will absolutely result in a loss of political power, these con-men will come around out of nothing more than shallow self-interest.

[Bluebear]

91. :nodding:

[depakid]

106. Barack continues to impress

What else can one say?

Seems like Clinton before him- he's anxious to work with a Republican majority in the House- and then the Senate.

[Marr]

107. Funny, what he'll fight for and what he only pays lip service to.

Isn't it?

I remember seeing one of his old college professors interviewed during the campaign. The professor said he was surprised Obama was running as a Democrat, because he'd always assumed, given his positions, that he was a Republican.