[Spartan79]

This is why I’m beginning to think we may see a repeat of the 1986-1989 Section 89 debacle. I haven’t seen many other folks commenting on the parallels (maybe few remember the details), but as part of the 1986 Tax Reform Act congress engaged in an earlier attempt to expand health coverage and tax cadillac plans for highly compensated employees (at the time those earning $50,000 or more per year). The effort enraged business and taxpayers to the extent that it crashed in flames in 1989, with a still-democratic dominated house voting 390-36 for repeal.

I found a little more information about this debacle at http://blog.angusmcrae.com/taxing-health-benefits-remember-section-89/. Freepers might want to start studying up on section 89 for hints as to what might be forthcoming if some cobbled-together “health care reform” does become law later this year.

[neverdem]

Then there are the Medicare cuts that supposedly would finance the Baucus bill. But this Congress can't bind future Congresses, and Congresses controlled by both parties have regularly cancelled projected cuts in reimbursement rates. Democratic leaders have made this easier by exempting such actions from its pay-go rules.

I didn't know that.

[HiTech RedNeck]

They are talking about astounding gummit insurance premiums being foisted on everybody. They might as well call that a tax.