AFP Action issued the following announcement on June 9
There’s a consistent theme running through the president’s “infrastructure” plan: The spending of mind-boggling sums of taxpayer money for partisan pet projects seems only to benefit politically connected interests at the expense of the average American. Here’s a breakdown of how this rings true for our health care.
President Joe Biden’s proposed “infrastructure” package has little to do with infrastructure. Less than 5 percent of the package would go toward roads and bridges — out of over $4 trillion in spending.
Hundreds of billions of dollars would be directed toward corporate welfare and other partisan giveaways. Politically connected companies and other interests see a windfall in this deal. The average American should not.
The president’s proposal would represent one of the largest spending sprees in our history, paid for by one of the largest tax increases.
That would be a disaster for America’s taxpayers and those relying on a strong recovery after the COVID-19 pandemic.
But this proposal has another victim: Your health care.
Americans don’t typically think of government growing its power over medicine when they think of infrastructure, but that’s exactly what this plan would do.
Most just want access to quality, affordable care and would like greater control of their health care decisions.
Washington’s “infrastructure” proposal would hurt our health care by:
- Putting your family’s medical decisions in the hands of the government.
- Kicking millions of Americans off their insurance plans.
- Making care less accessible.
A massive giveaway to insurance companies and the highest earners on the taxpayer dime
The president’s proposal contains a multitude of health care provisions, but they wouldn’t help Americans in need.
The largest beneficiaries of this spending are insurance companies and the highest earners.
Insurance companies are lobbying strongly in favor of this package. Why? The proposal would deliver tens of billions of dollars in additional subsidies to them each year, as part of Affordable Care Act expansion.
We’ve seen the effects of ACA expansion. These benefits are often directed toward the highest earners.
The recent $1.9 trillion COVID-19 “relief” package, for example, made 3.5 million people in the top two income quintiles — 1.1 million of whom had incomes above 600 percent of the federal poverty level — eligible for subsidized insurance.
These expansions, we are told, are meant to help low-income Americans first and foremost. That isn’t the case. People in the top two income quintiles would collect the largest average premium subsidies.
This proposal would hurt Americans with employer-provided insurance
These ACA expansion subsidies are unfair, of course, but they are also destructive.
The insurance tax credit for ACA premiums would be much higher than the credit available for employer-sponsored insurance premiums. In effect, Americans would be penalized for sticking with the insurance they get through their employers and would likely be pushed onto ACA plans.
The result? Millions of employees would lose their employer coverage.
That would endanger the health benefits that millions of Americans have earned through their employers.
The proposal would hurt workers while giving another handout to unions
There’s a consistent theme running through the president’s plan: The spending of mind-boggling sums of taxpayer money for partisan pet projects seems only to benefit politically connected interests at the expense of the average American.
Take the proposal’s $400 billion expense for home-based care, a plan marketed by the White House primarily as a way to benefit unions with collective bargaining mandates and other perks. This isn’t an investment in infrastructure. It’s not even an investment in the average American.
This is a handout to politically favored groups at taxpayer expense.
Lawmakers should reject the president’s “infrastructure” proposal. It would spend trillions for politicians’ favorite companies and unions — and it would leave taxpayers holding the bag, especially when it comes to their health care.
Original source can be found here.
Alerts Sign-up