TIME: OMG! An Article Discussing The Substance (gasp) Of Healthcare Reform

The Project for Excellence in Journalism issued a report noting that 75 percent of media covergare on healthcare reform is not on substance, but on personalities and politics. So, in a bit of a surprise, here is a nice article in TIME magazine actually providing a relatively easy to follow summary of the issues being debated. It is not comprehensive, but at least it talks about the issues at an understandable level for most:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1913707_1913694,00.html

###

Current Situation: Employee contributions to job-sponsored health coverage have more than doubled in the past decade. Plans, which are tax-free, are often more generous than those available on the open market. But workers can't take their coverage with them if they switch jobs or are laid off.

How Reform Could Affect You
The upside: If all employers are required to offer insurance, employer-sponsored plans would never be eliminated. More regulation could reduce the chances that insurers would deny fair claims. A public plan could provide competition in the marketplace and drive down private insurers' premiums.

The downside: Lawmakers are considering taxes on some of the most expensive employee health plans — taxing either employees directly or insurance companies. But insurers are likely to just pass this cost along to consumers, driving up rates. Other taxes could be levied to help cover the poor and uninsured.

###

But because the cost of insurance can be deducted to a point on the Schedule A, the benefits are not taxed. They are included as income when it comes to Medicare and Social Security caps.

I can't believe they want to tax a plan!!! I can understand nailing the rich but taxing should be out of the salary - the rich pay more! Some people have wonderful health plans because it comes with the job. They didn't ask for them!

One; get the insurance companies out of the health care patient loop and two; businesses should not be paying/supplying health insurance.

Mandating that employers provide health coverage is the opposite of what we need to be doing.