Thursday, March 24, 2011

One Year Later: STILL Bad for Women and Families

While Democrats attempt today to sell their unpopular health care law to women, its provisions provide many specific reasons why women and families should oppose both the law and its harmful effects:

Marriage Penalty:  The law bases health insurance subsidy thresholds on multiples of the federal poverty level, and because the poverty level for a two-person couple ($14,710) is less than twice the poverty standard for a single person ($10,890), couples who marry will see their eligibility for subsidies automatically decline when compared to two cohabiting individuals.  Many may view this policy as providing perverse incentives for couples not to marry.

Another Marriage Penalty:  Among its more than half-trillion dollars in new taxes, the measure raises the payroll tax by a total of $210.2 billion – and the higher taxes apply to incomes of $200,000 for a single individual, but $250,000 for a family.  Thus a married couple with wage earnings of $195,000 each will pay $5,320 more in taxes than two single persons with the same salary.

Employer Mandate Will Hurt Women and Young Workers:  The law penalizes employers who do not provide “acceptable” coverage, forcing them to pay a “fair share” penalty of $2,000 per full-time employee.  Harvard Professor Kate Baicker’s analysis demonstrates that at least 5.5 million low-wage workers would be “at substantial risk of unemployment” due to new mandates on employers.  What’s more, women and young adults “face the highest risk of losing their jobs under employer mandates.”

Federal Funds for Abortion:  The law permits federal funds to subsidize plans covering abortion, permits a multi-state health plan to offer abortion coverage, and requires citizens in states that have opted-out of elective abortion coverage in their own exchange to fund federal subsidies for plans that cover elective abortion in other states.  These provisions will result in the federal government funding actions that violate decades-long precedents for federal health coverage – including that provided to Members of Congress – and that many find morally objectionable.

Rising Debt a Fiscal Time Bomb for Future Generations:  At a time of record budget deficits, the health law spends $2.6 trillion in its first 10 years of full implementation.  Growing the debt problem by adding trillions more of federal spending will only increase the debt burden to be faced by future generations.