Last week, Senator Tom Coburn (R-Ok), also known as Dr. Coburn, pressed the Senate Health Committee to approve his idea of requiring members of congress to enroll in whatever "public plan" is passed to compete with private insurance companies.  On the House side, they have unveiled its 1,018 page health care proposal that costs nearly $1 billion per page and still doesn't solve the problem of providing coverage to all Americans.  What say you about this?   Please comment  http://terry-neese-blog.com/

In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office, under the House bill the number of Americans without health insurance increases over the next three years.  

The House proposal would extend insurance to 37 million (still leaving 17 million uninsured) Americans over the next decade, covering more by expanding Medicaid and providing subsidies to help the uninsured meet the new federal mandate to purchase insurance.

Who is going to pay for increased coverage?  Small business for one– big time!  Sign this petition to stop government takeover of health care:  http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/ 

To pay for new spending, the House Democrats are proposing a surtax on those individuals who make $280,000 or more (the tax would range from 1% to 5.4%).  The tax continues to rise the more money you make.  The proposal doesn't include any exemptions for S corporations or other small businesses, many who file as individuals for tax purposes.  In fact, half of all small businesses with 20-249 employees are likely to have their income affected by the surtax.

The bad news doesn't stop there.  If the surtax doesn't generate enough revenue to cover the costs of the bill by 2013, the surtax automatically doubles.   For business owners, that is like charging your customers double for a product because you can't meet your numbers for the year.

And still, it gets worse.  Employers whose payroll exceeds $400,000 and cannot provide coverage to their employees would be hit with a penalty that is equal to 8 percent of workers' wages.  According to the National Federation of Independent Businesses, this new mandate would result in the loss of more than 1.6 million jobs over five years; one million of those from small businesses.

Surtaxes and mandates only hurt small businesses that are struggling to keep their doors open and the lights on in this difficult economy.   This is no time to tell small businesses they have a choice between paying a new tax or being mandated to buy expensive health plans for their employees, especially when  small businesses account for around two-thirds of new jobs created.

Let me give you a real life example.  A small businesswoman who owns a private investigation and security company in Queens, New York employs 124 people now and hopes to grow her business to 300 people later this year.  She can't afford these new mandates.  

Last year her gross payroll was $3.9 million and net payroll was $2.8 million which means her payroll taxes alone were just shy of $1 million.  Adding an 8 percent penalty on workers' wages means her revenue goes down another $320,000 a year.  That is real money when you are trying to grow and expand your business.

She provides health care to some of her employees but isn't able to do so for everyone in the company, mainly because she is paying higher than average wages.  Forcing her to provide health insurance for all her employees is going to drive her to raise her prices, lay people off or shut her doors.

Stories like this can be found all across America.  Most small businesses are struggling with rising costs, smaller margins, and are simply unable to pay for new taxes or mandates.  Instead of forcing them to provide health care coverage, our policy makers should look at innovative ways to provide health care, that give small business owners more choices.  Ideas like expanding Health Savings Accounts or allowing small business owners to band together across state lines to pool their resources for health care coverage are better alternatives than new taxes and more mandates.

Congress needs to take its time to get it right.  Throwing money after a bad idea and making those who drive our economy pay for it is the wrong prescription.  What say you about this 1,000 plus page bill that costs you and me over $1 billion a page?

4 Responses to “Good for the Goose?—Will Congress have the same health care plan as Small Business Owners?”

1. Kathy Kristof Says:
   July 22nd, 2009 at 12:46 pm

   Hey Terry. This my take on the current health reform proposal. http://bit.ly/EHaVR Like you, I’m no fan. I think we should do more to provide universal coverage. But, this proposal doesn’t cure what ails us.

2. Good for the Goose?—Will Congress have the same health care plan as Small Business Owners? | NCPA « Three Fish Limit Says:
   July 22nd, 2009 at 2:21 pm

   [...] Full Story: Good for the Goose?. [...]

3. Barbara Amabile Says:
   July 22nd, 2009 at 4:26 pm

   Health care for everyone! Great Concept! Reality it’s not going to happen with this legislation. Stimulus????…hmmmmmm….When can small business owners expect to see their fair share of the Stimulus package…?????….Oh…that’s right it just went to the banks and the government and small business’ still are paying high interest loans and no support. AND now they want us to pay for everyones’ health care….go figure! VOTE NO!

4. Sherryl Says:
   December 15th, 2009 at 1:35 am

   Ok, so how do “WE THE PEOPLE” get an enactment on the books that forces our captial hill cronies to take part in the healt care bill?
   Thanks
   SherrylCm

Leave a Reply