See today’s Kaiser Daily Report and the Health Access California blog for details of a rapidly emerging health reform breakthrough in California announced today by Gov. Schwarzenegger and House Assemby Speaker Fabio Nunez. Not in on the party yet is Senate President Pro Tempore Don Perata, who wants details on how the Governator will deal with a $14B budget shortfall before signing on. Key components:
– New subsidized coverage program for uninsured up to 250% FPL;
– Tax deductions to finance coverage for those 251-400% FPL, with 5% of income cap;
– Pay-or-Play Employer payroll tax — 1/6.5%, depending on employer size;
– Individual mandate;
– $1.50 or $2 cigarette tax;
– 4% hospital revenue tax (to be offset by new federal revenues);
– Elimination of medical underwriting by health insurers;
– And a whole lot more.
Because of the CA constititional requirement that new taxes require a super-majority, and because not one Republican Senate or Assembly members will support the deal, the Legislature will not vote on financing. The financing needed to make the deal work will be put before the voters in November 2008.
The tobacco tax will almost certainly draw major tobacco industry financing to defeat the ballot initiative. The employer assessment will certainly draw major opposition from many parts of the business community — on the ballot, and most likely in federal courts on ERISA grounds if the ballot initiative prevails.
Hey, it’s kinda like an action movie.
No mistaking it, if this happens, it’s huge …
That’s great…the regular format is back!
The current version of the bill is pretty disasterous for all households above 250% FPL.
(1) “Tax credit” for households between 250-400% FPL if premiums exceed 5.5% of income. Exceeding 5.5% of income is really really easy.
One person would be incomes of $25,525 – 40,840 with monthly premiums of 5.5% being $117 – $187.
Two people would be incomes of $34,225 – $54,760 with monthly premiums of 5.5% being $156 – $250 total for 2.
Three people would be incomes of $42,925 – 68,680 with monthly premiums of 5.5% being $193- $314 total for 3.
Expecting households to pay 5.5% of income towards healthcare is not unreasonable.
Thinking they will be able to purchase coverage for those price ranges that is anything more than a $15,000 deductible plan that has low lifetime caps and actually pays anything towards healthcare costs is seriously delusional.
The CA bill has NO CAPS on how much insurers can charge.
Expecting households to go out and pay the full price for whatever insurers may choose to charge and then sit around and wait to collect a tax credit is pure fantasy.
No way could a household of 3 with an income betwen $42 – 68K be able go out and purchase a family plan at the going rate of $800 -1500 a month in CA and wait for tax time to patch the hole in the household budget. $9600 – 18000 a year for family coverage can not be finesse from the monthly household budget – not when it 14-42% of gross income.
(2)Tax credit do NOT WORK unless they are prepayable.
And these are NOT – or so it appears from a reading of the legislative committee reports and analyses.
(3) No caps on what insurers can charge any household and those just over 400% FPL are being tossed to the wolves.
Its a JOKE.
Just cuz you asked for it, Peter!
Hooray…the regular format is back!
For a fuller political context and to remind readers about the $750Mil in MA lobbying that was spent to influence our healthcare law, here’s what an unbiased advocacy group in CA had to say hours before the CA vote:
NEWS RELEASE, Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, December 17, 2007
CONTACT: Jamie Court, (310) 392-0522, ext. 327, or Carmen Balber, ext. 324
Labor & Medical Industry Give 56% of Prop 93 $$ to Win Concessions in Health Care Legislation;
Núñez Deal Would Force Consumers to Buy Health Insurance With No Limit on Price or Promise of Meaningful Benefits
Santa Monica, California — Labor unions, hospitals and doctors, health insurers and the drug industry have contributed $3.8 million to Proposition 93, the measure to extend legislative term limits, as they sought and received special benefits in Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez’s health care legislation, AB 1x, according to an analysis released today by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR).
Groups with a stake in the health care debate gave 56% of the $5.9 million contributed to Prop 93 to date. Click here to view the analysis.
“The Speaker has turned the legislature’s most pressing work into an ATM for the Prop 93 effort,” said Jamie Court, president of FTCR. “A vote to force a family of two making $54,000 per year to pay whatever health insurers want to charge is an outrageous gift to the medical-insurance complex that can only be explained by the potential for even bigger contributions to keep politicians in office longer.”
AB 1x now requires families of moderate income to buy expensive health insurance policies without a limit on their price or a requirement that insurers offer meaningful benefits. The bill would force families making $82,600 per year to buy a health insurance policy whose average cost is $12,000 per year — with no limit on premiums that can be charged by the insurance industry. The policies likely to predominate will be high-deductible, low-benefit coverage.
“There are few votes in a legislative career that will forever stain it. Today’s is one,” wrote FTCR in a floor alert to members of the Assembly this morning. Click here to read FTCRs floor alert.
Proposition 93′s largest donor, the Service Employees International Union, received a special provision in AB 1x that allows it to expand its membership by replacing licensed physicians and nurses with medical assistants it represents.
The FTCR analysis found:
- The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and affiliates contributed $1,110,000 (including $600,000 last week) to get changes to AB 1X allowing clinics at WalMart and other retail outlets to be staffed with minimally trained and unlicensed “medical assistants” organized by SEIU, rather than registered nurses.
- The American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and affiliates contributed $610,633 while seeking changes to AB 1X to increase the number of dues-paying home health care workers (organized by AFSCME & SEIU) by including coverage for those services in benefits packages.
- The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) contributed $35,000 to eliminate the ability of the new state insurance pool to bulk purchase cheaper drugs.
- Blue Cross of California contributed $50,000 to require Californians to buy private health insurance policies with no oversight over what insurers charge or the quality and scope of benefits that patients receive.
- The California Optometric Association and the Doctors of Optometry Issues PAC contributed $50,000; the California Dental Association contributed $250,000; the California Chiropractic Association and California Orthopaedic Association contributed $45,000. All seek to increase patients and revenue with the widest possible inclusion of their members¿ respective fields in benefit packages in AB 1X.
- The California Hospital Association contributed $100,000 to increase funding for, and expand commercial access to, previously uninsured patients through taxpayer-subsidized health coverage, and to include a deal reached with the Governor that would require hospitals to contribute 4% of income toward reform but provide more than that in returns, especially for the large, for-profit hospitals that comprise the majority of CHA’s membership.
“Your rejection of this bill will send a message that legislative process, the interests of your constituents and health care reform itself demand more than a rubber stamp on the Speaker’s wish to maximize fundraising for Proposition 93, his effort to extend legislators’ term limits,” FTCR wrote the Assembly. “Speaker Núñez is clearly willing to rush a vote on a complicated bill that has not been vetted in order to please the biggest donor to the Prop 93 campaign, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and to claim even a pyrrhic victory that can be touted in the pro-Prop 93 campaign.”
Click here to read more about the problems with mandatory health insurance.
- 30 -
The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights is California’s leading non-profit and non-partisan consumer watchdog group. For more information visit us on the web at: http://www.ConsumerWatchdog.org.
©2000-2006 FTCR. All Rights Reserved. Read our Terms of Use
Exciting news from California…might start a trend in employer responsibility that will move eastward…
On a mundane matter: Is this a new permanent color scheme for this blog? If so, I vote no! The “Green Marinée template” is very hard to read for those of us with older eyes…particularly when I am writing this comment.