Marriage Penalty On Steroids

According a chart compiled by the House Ways and Means Committee, the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Education and Labor Committee, the House Democrats’ Health care bill would create a monstrous marriage penalty.

The chart put together by these committees relates to the “Public Health Insurance Option.” According to the chart, 2 people living together, with each making $30,000 a year, would pay $1,320 in insurance premiums. According to the same chart, a married couple making $60,000 would pay $12,000 in insurance premiums, a difference of $10,680.

I couldn’t get the chart to format but here’s the statistical breakdown by income:

$60,000 — Married $12,000 Single, living together $1,320
$70,000 — Married $12,000 Single, living together $1,960
$80,000 — Married $12,000 Single, living together $2,880
$90,000 — Married $12,000 Single, living together $12,000

I suspect that what’s infuriating married couples is that single people making $30,000 each not only are paying less per year than a couple making $60,000 but also that the singles are getting their insurance subsidized by the taxpayers, many of whom are married couples paying $10,000+ more in insurance premiums.

During a debate with Mike Huckabee on FNS, Howard Dean made this comment:

I think small businesses will be helped enormously by health care reform. Small businesses with payrolls of less than half a million dollars don’t have to buy health insurance anymore for any of their employees. I think that’s a big step forward.

That’d obviously be a good deal for small businesses. Unfortunately, it wouldn’t be such a good deal for married couples dumped into the public option. This seems to agree with what the Heritage Foundation’s Robert Moffitt is quoted as saying:

Adds the Heritage Foundation’s Bob Moffit, “if an employer has a health care benefits package that is 12 to 13 percent of payroll, and they can solve their problem by paying an 8 percent payroll tax, I think they’re going to do it, and I think they’re going to do it significantly.”

I don’t know how many small businesses would dump their employees into the public option but I’ve got to believe that, given the choice between paying 12 percent or 8 percent of their payroll, most businesses, small, medium or large, would drop them and pocket the 4+ percent.

There’s an additional hit that the Democrats haven’t talked about, a provision often called the “concrete ceiling” by health care experts. A married couple making $58,000 a year and buying their insurance from the public option would pay $2,088 a year in insurance premiums. If that same married couple earned $59,000 a year, their insurance premiums would jump to $12,000. What’s worse is that only half of the $12,000 health insurance premium is tax deductable. That isn’t my opinion. That’s according to another table put together by the House Ways and Means Committee, the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Education and Labor Committee.

The public option would cripple most families’ budgets if they’re making more than $59,000 a year and getting their insurance through their employer.

TechnoratiTechnorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

2 Responses to “Marriage Penalty On Steroids”

  1. Carlos Says:

    It’s just one more way the donks are undermining morality in our country. In an epiphany yesterday I figured out why. The donks/libs/loonies are forever accusing Republicans/conservative of hypocrisy, and in many cases (like with the esteemed guvner of SC) they are correct.

    The donks/libs/loonies, OTOH, don’t claim to stand for any moral behavior. They do not acknowledge the sanctity of marriage, they don’t acknowledge the sanctity of life (except non-human animal life), they don’t acknowledge anything that leads to either a higher power or a morality bound by personal responsibility. As a logical end to that belief system (or lack thereof) there is little they can be accused of. Even the theft of billions of dollars in a transference of wealth is OK to them because the ends justify the means.

    So why not penalize marriage? It’s simply targeting dinosaurs that should come into the present “enlightened” age, one for which Jesus himself had a term: “generation of vipers”.

  2. USN Ret. Says:

    The thought that after nearly 40 years together, my wife and I should divorce as part of the annual rite of spring dance we have to with the F-ing IRS just to break even on taxes tells it all.

Leave a Reply