How the Wealthy Gain From GOP Health Care Bill

By Bengy Sarlin

republican

Republicans are once again bogged down in negotiations over health care, with moderates and conservatives pulling the Senate bill in different directions and polls showing the public overwhelmingly unhappy with their plans. But the key to understanding their struggles might not lie in health policy so much as tax policy.

As frustrated GOP senators are discovering, their bill is much less generous than Obamacare because it spends hundreds of billions of dollars less on people’s health care. And the main reason it spends so much less is that its savings are used to cut taxes for wealthy Americans and for medical companies.

How close is the relationship? When it comes to Medicaid, it’s almost 1:1. The Senate bill slashes tax revenues by $701 billion over a decade, while reducing Medicaid spending by $772 billion versus current law. Overall, the Senate bill reduces federal health care spending by $1 trillion.

The result: More Americans without insurance. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the bill would cover about 22 million fewer people by 2026 than Obamacare.

It might be easier to make this tradeoff if the Americans losing aid for health care were the ones benefiting from the tax cuts. But unless you’re paying a penalty under Obamacare’s individual mandate for deciding to go without insurance, you’re unlikely to notice the difference in your return.

Instead, the biggest gains from the bill, by far, go to the top 1 percent of earners and especially the top 0.1 percent. The individual taxes the Senate would eliminate, a 3.8 percent surtax on investment income and a 0.9 percent payroll tax, only apply to single filers making over $200,000 and families making over $250,000.

The cost of including these tax cuts, even for small numbers of high earners, is not chump change either. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities estimates the bill’s tax benefits for the 400 highest earning households in America alone are equal to the cost of keeping Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion in four states that cover 726,000 people.

On the spending side, the bill requires people to pay higher premiums to buy a private plan similar to what’s available under Obamacare. It accomplishes this by reducing spending on subsidies and distributing them in a way that encourages people to purchase higher deductible plans with lower premiums. At the same time, it eliminates Obamacare subsidies that help low-income people pay their deductibles.

Here, too, the lower end of the economic spectrum fares worse than the higher end. The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation projected premiums for people making over and under 200 percent of the federal poverty line (about $24,000 a year for an individual) and found the biggest spikes came for older low-income customers. The CBO also found this group would have the hardest time finding affordable insurance under the Senate bill.

Some Republicans are interested in easing the bill’s Medicaid cuts and making subsidies for private insurance more generous at low incomes, but the math doesn’t add up as long as the bill gives them $700 billion less in revenue to work with than Obamacare. And some Republican senators have expressed unease in recent days with the bill’s tax cut for investment income from high earners and indicated GOP leaders might drop the idea.

“The point is, you cannot increase the burden on lower-income citizens and lessen the burden on wealthy citizens,” Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., told NBC News  “That’s not an equation that works.”

Keeping Obamacare’s tax on investment income adds $172 billion over 10 years, which is significant. But there’s little talk of keeping the taxes on medical companies, which critics say are passed on in higher prices for consumers. Nor is there any indication yet that Republicans are willing to raise taxes elsewhere to make up the income.

That could leave them with the same fundamental problem: Less spending that provides fewer benefits than Obamacare can deliver.

 

Pin It

Add comment

Security code
Refresh

The Dark Side Of The Dream By Alejandro Grattan-Dominguez, Arte Publico Press 434 pages $11.95 US Reviewed by ROB MOHR (Initially published in The
HOW MUCH IS YOUR VOTE WORTH? By David Harper   People come and live in Mexico for many reasons. The most often quoted is the weather and the fact
HOW RUGS GET SOLD By Margaret Van Every   José the rug vendor by the side of the road will tell you he comes from Oaxaca where his family
REVISED MEXICAN HEALTH CARE LAWS—and how it affects you. By Jackie Kellum, RN   As a nurse I am always interested in political decisions that
George Carlin’s Views on How to Stay Young   1. Throw out nonessential numbers. This includes age, weight and height. Let the doctors
Wordwise With Pithy Wit By Tom Clarkson   This morning, my pal F.T. – who shared the Iraq experience with me during my third trek there – forwarded
LAKESIDE LIVING Kay Davis Phone: 376 – 108 – 0278 (or 765 – 3676 to leave messages) Email: kdavis987@gmail.com November
Front Row Center By Michael Warren    The Pajama Game By Richard Adler and Jerry Ross Directed by Peggy Lord Chilton Music directed
Every Word  Important By Herbert W. Piekow   Every word a writer writes has meaning yes, sometimes they never get published or the book
LEGERDEMAIN—Italian Style By Jim Rambologna   Enzio Grattani was the Editor-in-Chief of a local rivista (or magazine) in Ajiermo, Italy. Locals

Author Articles

Our Issues

October 2017

october2017

September 2017

september2017

August 2017

august2017

July 2017

july2017

June 2017

june2017

Mayo 2017

may2017

April 2017

april2017

March 2017

march2017

February 2017

february2017

 

More....