[PistolPaknMama]

To help pay for job-based private health coverage, the group proposed a separate tax credit for non-poor families

Who in FReeperdom knows what this means? If insurance is "job-based" it isn't private. I pay for private health insurance because my employer doesn't pay for it. So they are proposing a tax credit if my employer pays my insurance OR if I pay my insurance? Which is it?

And what do either of those have to do with insuring illegals and anchor babies. "Private health insurance" doesn't pay for much that isn't catasrophic. Are they, whoever they is, proposing I should help subsidize a health plan with more benefits than my private insurance that I also subsize 100%? Is there some incentive here that I shouldn't quit my high-premium insurance and get on the dole with better benfits?

[sheana]

Are they, whoever they is, proposing I should help subsidize a health plan with more benefits than my private insurance that I also subsize 100%? Is there some incentive here that I shouldn't quit my high-premium insurance and get on the dole with better benfits?

That's easy......yes they want you to subsidize it and they will make sure that you are not able to participate in the program that you are paying for.
How's that? When you get confused just remember.....you will ALWAYS get hosed.

[Wiseghy]

Nearly all small business employers and many larger groups ONLY pay for employee coverage. That means that those employees with families must pay anywhere from $300 a month to $1000 a month or more to cover their spouse and children.

Under Section 125 (IRS Code), employees can have their family premium contributions removed from their paychecks on a pre-tax basis. However, that isn't as valuable a benefit to cash starved lower income families, who are not in very high tax brackets. Creating a credit basically gives these families extra money for buying healthcare insurance through their employer.

As a proposal, it is less objectionable than others, because they are still buying private insurance.