IRS AGENTS 'BREATHING DOWN' OUR NECKS: Fox News and Republican lawmakers have been pushing a talking point claiming that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will need to hire more than 16,500 new agents to enforce the universal insurance mandates in the Affordable Care Act, and that the agency will impose harsh punishments on those who don't purchase insurance it deems worthy. At least a dozen Republican lawmakers pushed the meme, with Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) calling it a "dangerous expansion of the IRS's power and reach into the lives of virtually every American." Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) warned Fox News host Sean Hannity that "the IRS will be tasked with breathing down the neck of 300 million Americans every month to determine whether we have purchased governmentally acceptable levels of health insurance." Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) and others attributed the 16,500 figure to "the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office," but as PolitiFact noted, the figure does not come from the CBO. It comes from a report prepared by the Republican staff of the House Ways and Means Committee, which used rough estimates from the CBO in order to fabricate the 16,500 figure. During a recent congressional hearing, IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman made it clear that these claims are nothing but "misconceptions." When asked whether the IRS would "verify if [Americans] have obtained acceptable health insurance," Shulman flatly said "no," adding that there "are not going to be any discussions about health coverage with an IRS employee." As for claims of draconian enforcement, including jail time, for those who do not buy insurance, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) noted on her web site, "The bill specifically prohibits the IRS from confiscating taxpayer assets, from using liens or levies, or imposing criminal penalties of any kind -- including jail time -- because of a lack of health care coverage."
CORPORATE WRITE-DOWNS: For months, Republicans and their allies like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have been claiming that health care reform would create huge new taxes that would hurt businesses. Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, AT&T, Caterpillar, John Deere and others have come out with a series of -- seemingly coordinated -- press releases announcing that the new bill will cost them billions of dollars. An association representing 300 large corporations is also urging Congress to change the part of the Act that is responsible for the charge. Republicans and the right-wing media latched onto the news of the writedowns as proof that the bill will lead to the "wholesale destruction of wealth and capital," as a Wall Street Journal editorial put it. This is "the exact opposite of what the president promised if we passed health care," Fox News host Sean Hannity said of the writedowns. But in reality, these writedowns are due to a big cut in corporate welfare. The Medicare Part D legislation -- passed under President Bush -- gives subsidies of about $1,300 per retiree per year to businesses that provide prescription drugs to their retirees. On top of that, it allows companies to deduct the value of the credit from their taxes. The new health care law, however, pays for itself, in part, by eliminating waste in the system and puts an end to this "double dipping." Companies will still receive the tax-free subsidy, but they'll no longer be able to take the tax deduction as well. As the Wall Street Journal notes, these charges are "noncash," and the cost of losing this exemption is relatively small. And the relevant change doesn't kick in until 2013. Moreover, is disingenuous for companies to suddenly complain about the charges, considering the change was a part of the draft bill that passed the Senate Finance Committee last year and several business groups complained about it in September. Finance Committee aides "were in close talks with employer groups" and it ultimately won approval from many, with the chairman of Business Roundtable saying "it's very closely aligned to [our] principles."
A NEW TAX ON STUDENT LOANS: While its inclusion with the health care bill has often been overlooked, legislation to streamline the student loan system has not escaped its share of right-wing fear mongering. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) told Radio Iowa that the plan "end[s] up taxing college students" because they'll be forced to pay more borrowing from the government directly than if they could shop around for a loan from private lenders. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) agreed, claiming that students will spend "$1,700 to $1,800 more during the life of their loan because of this surcharge." But both Grassley and Graham are ignoring the fact that it SAFRA does not change interest rates, meaning that students will pay the same amount as they did before. As PolitiFact notes, the interest rates are set by law and were not changed by SAFRA -- "there is no 'surcharge' in the bill." Grassley and industry lobbyists have also claimed that people employed by private loan companies will lose their jobs "at a time when our country can least afford to lose them." But as Campus Progress notes, "There will be no shortage of work for loan companies under the new reforms," as federal loans will still be serviced by private companies. "In fact, student loan giant Sallie Mae has announced it is in the process of bringing back 3,400 jobs from overseas. These jobs are returning to the U.S., at least in part, so that the company can be eligible for Department of Education contracts to service Direct Loans," Campus Progress adds.
Let The Sun Shine In......
No comments:
Post a Comment
We post comments in English and only by followers of this blog. While anyone is free to read any of the material here, comments from self-identified, moderate to left-of-center independents are welcome to post after joining up. Others may comment by email and will occasionally be posted as well.