It's interesting that President Obama and the Democrats in Congress studiously avoided the issue of tax increases during the election, except when they accused then candidate McCain of wanting to impose the largest middle class tax increase in history. For those that don't (or won't) remember, the Obama campaign accused McCain of promoting a massive middle class tax increase:
"He tells you that he'll give you a tax credit of $2,500 per person -- $5,000 per family -- to help you pay for your insurance and health care costs. But like those ads for prescription drugs, you have to read the fine print to learn the rest of the story.You see, Senator McCain would pay for his plan, in part, by taxing your health care benefits for the first time in history. And this tax would come out of your paycheck."
Only now do voters learn, a mere five months into The One's presidency, that President Obama and Democrats in Congress are not only advocating the largest middle class tax increase in history, they want to tax a lot more:
Meanwhile, in the House, Democrats are exploring a range of funding options, including a surtax on the rich and an increase in the payroll tax imposed on all U.S. workers. The list also includes new taxes on sugary drinks and alcohol, along with broader levies, such as a national value-added tax of up to 3 percent.The Senate's preferred option -- taxing the health benefits that millions of Americans receive through their employers -- is also on the House list. So is Obama's favorite idea: limiting the value of itemized deductions for the nation's wealthiest 3 million taxpayers.
It is uncertain where this "healthcare reform" legislation will end. There are some encouraging signs that the most damaging policy proposal, the public option, seems to be going by the wayside. Voters see the public option for what it is, a stalking horse for budget busting (if it can be busted any more) nationalized health insurance. However, if voters are to take away anything from this debate it should be the utter dishonesty and dissembling of Candidate Obama who, for all his rhetoric and promises in 2008, is promoting the largest tax increase in history to fund the largest spending expansion in history. Obama apologists have worn out the "inherited problem" excuse already. There is nothing "inherited" about the healthcare policy debate. It's tax and spend Democrat policy at its worst.






Comments (3)
Well, this should be a trol... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Sheik Yur Bouty | June 19, 2009 10:46 AM | Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
Well, this should be a troll magnet...
1. Posted by Sheik Yur Bouty | June 19, 2009 10:46 AM |
Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
Posted on June 19, 2009 10:46
2. Posted by OLDPUPPYMAX | June 19, 2009 11:37 AM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Don't depend upon the MSM to remind voters of Hussein's dishonesty.
2. Posted by OLDPUPPYMAX | June 19, 2009 11:37 AM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on June 19, 2009 11:37
3. Posted by JLawson | June 20, 2009 4:12 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The overall arguement is that too many poor people depend on ER visits for their medical care... so why not sinply issue people under a certain income level medical 'debit' cards - that can ONLY be used for care in authroized urgent-care clinics supported by hospitals, and the various PA-in-a-box clinics like the ones in WalMarts and Walgreens and various other pharmacy chains.
That'll take care of the colds, the flu, the minor wounds and suchlike. If need be, the person can be referred to a doctor, or transferred to an ER For care.
If you currently have insurance, then you can use that, or use the card as a supplement if you don't make all that much. But it's looking more and more like this 'healthcare reform' is the usual 'progressive' destruction of a system that mostly works, for something 'perfect' that won't work well at all, at a price that's unaffordable.
3. Posted by JLawson | June 20, 2009 4:12 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on June 20, 2009 04:12