Everyone Hates Health Care III: Revenge of the Senate

Max Baucus, the chair of the Senate Finance Committee, has finally unveiled his much anticipated health care bill this week. And much like everything else associated with the health care debate, everyone hates it.

Senator Baucus' bill is the cheapest of all the bills circulating through Congress, totalling $856 billion over the next 10 years. But, the bill, which despite being negotiated with Republicans for months on a daily basis, at times, did not even win the endorsement of Olympia J. Snowe, the Republican Senator from Maine, with whom the Democrats have hoped to win support. Now the bill is drawing fire from both Democratic and Republican Senators alike, and a hailstorm of opposition from the House.

Among the many contested elements of the bill, is a 35 percent excise tax on high cost insurance policies. The threshold for these taxes would be on individual policies totalling over $8,000 a year and family policies totalling over $21,000. Republicans and Democrats alike have expressed concerns that the tax will only serve to hurt those in the middle class with more generous policies. While the tax is estimated to raise $215 billion over the next 10 years, many are still concerned that the tax will negatively affect many consumers. Senator John Kerry expressed his concern over the tax, stating that he felt the threshold was far too low. Not only is there this tax but there are tremendous fines for those who do not obtain healthcare coverage, penalizing individuals with a $950 fine and families with up to $3,800. So it would appear that, more than likely, you're gonna pay.

Another element of the bill that has drawn alot of fire, particularly from House Democrats, is the inclusion of citizenship verification for all those applying for government subsidies for healthcare. A similar element was introduced in the House by Republicans, and quickly defeated. The Bill also eases income requirements for those applying for Medicaid, the already troubled and overburdened healthcare system for the needy. Senator Baucus' bill would also make massive cuts to the Medicare system totalling $500 billion. However, Democrats have assured that the cuts would not restrict benefits.

Of course, no discussion of the health care debate would be complete without discussing the never ending issue of the public-run insurance plan. The Senate bill is one of the few, if not the only, bill to not include the now infamous public option. Instead, the bill would create non-profit insurance co-ops that would help to foster greater access to affordable health care. Liberals are outraged that the public option has not been included and have made quite clear that they would not expect such a bill to make it through the house. Meanwhile Republicans have made quite clear that they would not endorse bills with the public option.

The Senate bill is likely the last bill to be put on the table by both houses of Congress. And now, we debate. Democrats are desperately struggling to find the 60 vote threshold that would allow them to prevent any filibusters of the bill. However, while the Democrats are one senator short of having that number, it is far from certain that the Democratic Caucus would be unanimous in keeping a filibuster off the table. The senate democrats are extremely divided over what they feel is important in the bill and their own individual concerns as to what the bill does and does not address.

With all of the opposition from all sides, it is hard to even imagine what will happen when it comes time to stick a bill together from the House proposals and the Senate proposals. But I must say that when it's televised I will have my popcorn at the ready for watching all the drama unfold.

“Do I believe there is enough consensus around here to get a bill done in the end? Yes,” says Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania. “But I also believe it is going to be a difficult couple of weeks.”

I guess we shall see....

Sources:


NY Times

NY Post

NY Times

2010: A Gubernatorial Odyssey

As we hope for Rudy Giuliani to run for Governor of New York in 2010, we must look at his record and ask ourselves if he is really the right man for the job. Well first we must ask, what is the job?

New York State is currently suffering at the hands of the current leadership in Albany. We have a dysfunctional legislature. The State Senate spent over a month this past summer in an impassé while both the Republicans and Democrats battled over who had control of the senate, with the only clear fact being that Governor David Patterson certainly did not. The current leadership has done more wasteful spending than one could dream of, giving raises and bonuses in a time of financial crisis. We have bailed out the MTA, leaving New York City and seven surrounding counties with huge financial burdens to support, while the MTA continues to spend money unchecked, with no forensic audit having been done. Governor Patterson was not only unable to broker the deal, he has given the Chairman of the MTA a contract that awards him a half million dollars upon resignation. Taxes have been increased. The wealthy have received a host of new taxes, prompting them to pick up and leave New York, along with many jobs. New smaller taxes have been implemented to nickel-and-dime taxpayers. And we have instituted, for the first time ever, a tax on tax-exempt institutions in the twelve counties comprising the “Metropolitan Commuter Transportation District.” Unemployment is at the worst it has been since the early ‘90’s. Private sector jobs have dropped nearly 4 percent in the past year, that’s over 200,000 jobs across the state. New York State has reached a level of 8.6 percent rate of unemployment, and New York City has a 9.6 percent rate of unemployment. And under the current leadership we have hit a projected deficit of 8.6 billion dollars. Now ask yourself, could Rudy do a better job?

In 1993 when Rudy Giuliani took office as the Mayor of New York City he inherited a 2.3 billion dollar deficit. By responsible fiscal action in cutting spending and reducing the municipal payroll, Rudy was able to turn that deficit into a multi-billion dollar surplus, all while he lowered taxes. In fact, during his tenure as Mayor, Rudy enacted over 2.5 billion dollars in tax reductions. As Mayor, Rudy created over 450,000 jobs in the private sector as a result of his fiscal policies. Rudy dealt endlessly with the MTA’s many problems, having helped broker deals with employees to prevent strikes and helping to manage their never-ending fiscal problems, all while doing his best to prevent fare increases and service cuts. New York City is now one of the cleanest, safest and most prosperous cities in America, thanks to Rudy.

Rudolph W. Giuliani has demonstrated the experience, the knowledge, and the ability to lead New York State. We need a Governor who will take control of our state. Who will reign in wasteful spending. Who won’t increase taxes. Who will create jobs. Who will create functionality in our government. And who will stand up for the rights of our citizens. We need Rudolph W. Giuliani for Governor in 2010.

The Fiscal Hostage Taking

The Fiscal Hostage Taking:

When the MTA’s Greed Meets Albany’s Unrestraint

As people from Long Island, Upstate New York and Connecticut travel into work in New York City each day, they’ve all noticed one thing: it costs more. Bridge and tunnel tolls went up midway through July. Subway and bus fares went up by about 12.5 percent, 25 cents, at the end of June. In November, those who travel by way of taxi in New York City will find themselves paying even more than the already excessively expensive cab rides, when a 50 cent surcharge is tacked on.

Why is this all happening? Well there’s a very simple reason. The MTA needs more money. Earlier this year the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), following the example of our banks, went to Albany pleading poverty and demanding money from the New York State legislature in order to remain solvent; the MTA threatened fare hikes of over 25 percent for buses, subways and trains as well as extensive service cuts if an alternative source of income was not found. The MTA controls Metro North Railroad, Long Island Railroad, The New York City bus and subway systems as well as many New York City bridges and tunnels, including the Verrazano Bride, Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Bridge and the Queens Midtown Tunnel. After months of debate the NYS Assembly and Senate passed a bill to create and maintain additional funding for the MTA in a matter of two days. The bill is estimated to raise about one billion dollars for the MTA in 2009 and around 1.9 billion dollars in 2010. You may find yourself wondering: Where is all this money coming from? The answer is YOU.

The MTA Bailout bill has caused outraged protest throughout the 12 county region it affects, named the “Metropolitan Commuter Transportation District,” a region solely connected by the presence of the MTA within it. The bill has created a series of new taxes and fees to be imposed. Taxpayers, businesses, non-profit organizations, local governments, public schools, and hospitals are just some of those being hurt by the bill. The bill includes new license and registration fees, a new tax on rental cars and a surcharge on taxi rides. The elephant in the bill is a retroactive .34 percent payroll tax put on everyone, including New York State itself. “It’s offensive.” says Marc Molinaro, a New York State Assemblyman representing parts of Dutchess County. “It’s the first time, as best we can tell, in New York State history where New York State imposed a tax on tax-exempt institutions.”

While there is a section of the bill that allocates to reimburse public schools for their payment of the payroll tax, it leaves one to wonder, why didn’t they just exempt public schools from the tax? Assemblyman Joel Miller of the 102^nd Assembly District says, “People have to realize that even though there was some reference to ‘we’re going to give the money back to the public schools,’ that’s a lie. It’s not in the bill. It’s simply a reference to an INTENT to do something, and this government never follows through on intents, they don’t even follow through on the law. So that’s not happening.” And Assemblyman Miller is absolutely right. The language used in the bill is as follows: “It is the intent of the Governor to submit and the legislature to enact for each fiscal year after the ’09 – ’10 fiscal year in an annual budget bill an appropriation in the amount to be paid to school districts pursuant to this section.” Assemblyman Molinaro feels the same way, saying, “Living by a commitment made by the State of New York for future years is like hoping to visit Neverland.”

“We’re not paying it!” jokes Richard Barrett, town supervisor of Milan, a town of about 2,500 people in Northern Dutchess County. “The MTA tax is retroactive to March of ’09. And we never budgeted it because we were just informed that it was due.” While Milan only has to pay about 850 dollars, larger towns in the region have to pay far more. On the website for the town of East Fishkill one is welcomed with “ARE YOU FED UP WITH THE NEW MTA PAYROLL TAXES? PLEASE CALL THE NYS GOVERNOR AND ASSEMBLY SPEAKER AND LET THEM KNOW!” emblazoned in bold lettering. Supervisor John Hickman says that East Fishkill had to allocate upwards of 15,000 dollars to pay the retroactive tax for 2009 and that the town will owe 29,000 dollars in 2010. In fact, New York State itself has to pay about 15 million dollars into the payroll tax each year.

Think you’ve heard the best yet? Oh, it gets better. Despite all of the money being poured into the MTA, there has yet to be a forensic audit of the MTA. That’s right. Albany closed their eyes and handed over the keys to the bank. Not only has there not been an audit since the bailout bill was written, but the MTA actually hires the company that does their audit, which the MTA itself then submits to the state, after review. “I’m not even sure there’s enough ethics and morality in enough people to accomplish anything.” says Joel Miller, one of the assemblymen who have been pushing for an independent forensic audit of the MTA. “Here’s an organization that kept two sets of books and lied about their reserve funds; that increased fares when there was no need to increase fares.”

While the bill contains a clause allowing the State Legislature to commission an independent audit of the MTA, Assembly Speaker, Sheldon Silver, declined to bring the commission of an audit to vote before the Assembly. In fact, in a press release, Mr. Silver, who represents parts of New York City, predominantly in Manhattan, was quoted as saying, “The bill provides a stable, long term funding stream for our buses, subways, Long Island Rail Road and Metro-North and spreads the burden equally among everyone who has a stake in the region's future.” Assemblyman Molinaro cares to disagree stating, “Quite frankly, other than the boroughs of New York City, Long Island and the four counties of the Mid-Hudson Valley get treated as second class citizens in the discussions.” He goes on to say that, “You have the four counties of the Mid-Hudson Valley shouldering disproportionately the burden without receiving the same service and with little address of the waste and fraud and abuse that exists within the agency. And that is offensive at best to us. It’s like a fiscal hostage taking. We’re forced to pay, we get limited services and there’s nothing we can do about it.”

In part H of section 1 of the bailout bill, Albany sought to create transparency and accountability within the MTA. But in reality, which Albany seems to exist outside of, part H created a sovereign leader of the MTA by combining the positions of Chairman and CEO. Now, the chairman of the MTA has fiscal and administrative power over all of the MTA and its subsidiaries. You may find yourself wondering, how does that create accountability and transparency? It doesn’t. Who is the MTA Chair accountable to? It would seem that many people are left asking the same question. He’s not accountable to the riders. He’s not accountable to those of us stuck paying the bill for the MTA. So who, then, is he accountable to?

So what has the MTA Bailout done for us? Fares and tolls still went up. New taxes and fees were imposed upon us. A position of unaccountable power was given to the leader of the MTA. What has been done for us, the people? The MTA has been given a nearly 2 billion dollar bailout, with no sunset on the taxes and fees imposed. They’ve raised fares and tolls for which the MTA expects 50 million dollars for each one percent increase. And as if that weren’t enough money already, the MTA recently held a public hearing on the topic of obtaining federal stimulus funds. As we all sit here scratching our heads over this bailout, my final question is: Is there any end to the greed of the MTA?

All interviews and writing by: Kyle T. Collins