WASHINGTON — Taxing workers for employer-provided medical benefits could
become the next big controversy for President Barack Obama in his quest
to overhaul the nation's health care system.
A key senator
involved in efforts to reach a bipartisan compromise said Wednesday the
$1 trillion, 10-year package probably can't be paid for without taxing
at least some high-value health care plans.
Obama adamantly
opposed such a change in last year's presidential campaign but has
since left the door open. Kathleen
Sebelius, the U.S. Health and Human Services secretary, told House lawmakers Wednesday that Obama is willing to listen
to suggestions on how to pay for a health care overhaul, as long as
they don't increase the deficit.
Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., the Senate Budget Committee chairman, told reporters, "it's hard to see how you
have a package paid for" that doesn't include a benefits tax.
Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the Senate Finance Committee chairman, said "there's a lot of merit" to Conrad's point.
Discussion on the benefits tax is starting to come together, Baucus said.
The idea would be to tax as income the portion of health benefits worth
more than a specified limit. Senators are considering several options,
including one that would set the limit at $17,240 for family coverage and $6,800 for individuals. Plans worth more than that would be taxed.
By
comparison, the Blue Cross Blue Shield Standard Option offered to
federal employees — which reflects the broad market — costs about
$13,400 for family coverage and $5,900 for individuals.
Obama's proposal to limit tax deductions for wealthy
individuals is "on the table" even though lawmakers previously had
dismissed it, Conrad said.
Of the five House and Senate committees working on
health care, Finance is the only one that appears to have a chance at a
bipartisan agreement.
Obama and his administration stepped up
the campaign for a comprehensive health care overhaul that would reduce
costs and provide coverage to nearly 50 million uninsured Americans.
The president met with several Republican and Democratic governors
Wednesday afternoon and planned a prime-time town hall to be broadcast
on ABC.
"There's no perfect unanimity across the table in terms
of every single aspect of reform," Obama said after the meeting with
Republican Govs. Jim Douglas of Vermont and Mike Rounds of South
Dakota, and Democrats Jim Doyle of Wisconsin, Jennifer Granholm of
Michigan and Christine Gregoire of Washington.
But Obama said the administration was committed to working with governors.
In
an interview with ABC News that aired Wednesday morning, Obama declined
to say whether he was open to taxing health benefits. But he indicated
there was a breaking point in the balance sheets where he would say
that the cost of reforming the system is too great for the federal
government to handle.
"I'm going to wait and see what ideas ultimately they (Congress) come up with," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America."
"I
think that if any reform that we get is not driving down costs in a
serious way," Obama added. "If people say, 'We're just going to add
more people onto a hugely inefficient system,' then I will say no.
Because ... we can't afford it."
In addition to the benefits
tax, three other complex issues continue to bedevil the bipartisan
negotiators. They include the overall cost of the plan, requiring
employers to contribute to the costs of covering their workers and
whether to set up a government insurance plan to compete with private
companies.
Sebelius defended Obama's call for a new public plan
in the face of strong opposition from Republicans and fresh criticism
from a powerful business group.
She told the House Energy and
Commerce Committee that a government-run option would increase choice
and competition, but the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in testimony
that it would "gut the private market."
"Whether or not this
proposal is a Trojan horse for single-payer health care, it is apparent
that its cause is ideological, not pragmatic," the Chamber said
Wednesday.
"If there is no choice in the
market, cost regulation is almost irrelevant. It's a marketplace
strategy that competition is often more effective than heavy-handed
regulation," Sebelius said.
Republicans and outside groups are making the
public plan issue a focus of stepped-up television ad campaigns that
warn of a government takeover of health care, contending the result
would be rationing of care similar to Canada and other countries.
But
Sebelius said that "rationing, frankly, is something that happens each
and every day under our current system." It's done by private insurers,
she said.
"Health reform constitutes our most important domestic priority," she said.
Benefits tax advances in health care negotiations
Wednesday, June 24, 2009 | 5:26 p.m. CDT;
updated 11:18 a.m. CDT, Thursday, September 3, 2009
To read the full article, please sign up or login.
Get full access to the Columbia Missourian on your computer, phone, and tablet for just $5.95 per month. Or click here for full access for one day for only 99 cents.
* Unlimited access on your iPhone, iPad, Android phone and Android tablet
* All the high-quality, in-depth journalism of the Columbia Missourian and Vox Magazine, updated 24/7
* Your news. Your device. Your time.
If you'd like to read more about the value of being a member, read this column from the Missourian's executive editor, Tom Warhover.
advertisements