Quote:
Dems infight over health bill funding

By PATRICK O'CONNOR | 10/13/09 5:12 AM EDT

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has a tax problem: The so-called millionaire’s tax that her fellow House Democrats want to use to pay for the bulk of their health care legislation won’t keep pace with rising costs.

For the California congresswoman, who’s been echoing President Barack Obama’s mantra that health care reform shouldn’t add a dime to the federal deficit, the prospect could result in a sea of red ink. And it’s giving moderates plenty to grumble about.

The months-long fight over an optional government-run insurance plan has generated much public tension between liberal and conservative Democrats. Now the competing wings are locked in a behind-the-scenes tussle in the House over how to pay for the proposal.

Liberals have drawn a line, with the help of organized labor, against the Senate plan to tax high-end health care plans, arguing it would ensnare too many middle-income workers. And moderates are raising red flags about the millionaire’s tax.

“The problem with the surtax is that wages don’t keep up with the costs of health care,” said Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.), a member of the conservative Blue Dog Coalition who would rather not raise taxes at all.

“Every year, you lose ground,” he said. “It’s likely after 10 years, we fall off a cliff.”

With party leaders in both chambers committed to their separate approaches, this financing showdown is unlikely to be resolved until Democrats meld the House and Senate bills in a joint conference committee. In the interim, evidence keeps mounting against both proposals.

House Democrats plan to generate nearly $460 billion over the next decade by taxing individuals who make more than $500,000 and couples who make more than $1 million a year — a significant increase in the income threshold from the initial plan drafted by New York Rep. Charles Rangel and his fellow Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee. In recent days, the speaker and others have raised the possibility of including other taxes, such as a windfall-profits tax on insurance companies.

The surtax would be pegged to inflation, which doesn’t rise as quickly as health care spending. A recent study by the Lewin Group, commissioned by fiscal watchdogs at the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, found that the House bill would add $39 billion to the deficit by 2019. But in the following 10 years, the legislation would generate more than $1 trillion in red ink because of “the rapid growth in health care costs that will outpace the growth in incomes and revenues.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28208.html

I pay the insurance company or I pay higher taxes, Crooks to the left of me Robbers to the right, I'm not seeing much difference. Just different hands in my pocket. I recommend to anyone running a small business, go hire the very best best tax consultant you can afford and make sure he/she is reputable and works within the law. Develop a corporate tax strategy. I have and my "tax footprint" will remain mighty small throughout 2010 regardless of what they do. For all you folks working a weekly job for someone else, help change the balance of power in the House in 2010 and we won't have to deal with tax and spend, the heck with the economy mentality.