Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s exorbitant healthcare plan would reportedly spike taxes in GOP-led states while reducing them in Democrat-led ones.
At the moment, millions of businesses across the country pay directly for their employees’ health care. Warren’s plan calls for these payments to instead be redirected to the federal government via a new tax.
But according to Justin Haskins of the 35-year-old Heartland Institute, this tax would burden red states more than blue states. Why? Because the tax would be based on each state’s current healthcare costs.
Elizabeth Warren’s health care plan is a giant crony scam designed to help blue-state businesses and destroy businesses in red states. Please read and share! #MedicareForAll @ewarren https://t.co/iLUOjYHLkq
— Justin T. Haskins (@JustinTHaskins) December 9, 2019
“Over time, an employer’s health care cost-per-employee [tax] would be gradually shifted [from their current value] to converge at the average health care cost-per-employee nationally. That helps make sure the system is fair but also gives employers and employees time to adapt to the new system,” Warren’s plan explicitly reads.
As a result, businesses that reside in states which currently boast lower healthcare costs would wind up paying more, while businesses in states with higher healthcare costs would pay less. The problem, according to Haskins, is that red states generally boast lower premiums while blue states generally boast higher premiums.
“The Kaiser Family Foundation reports the average annual family premium per enrolled employee paid by businesses in 2018 was $16,108 in Warren’s home state of Massachusetts. But the average family premium per enrolled employee is less than $13,000 in several states, including Georgia, Idaho and Mississippi,” he wrote for Fox News last week.
“Warren’s proposal would push health care costs down by thousands of dollars in higher-cost states while increasing costs dramatically in lower-cost states. And guess what? By a remarkable coincidence, people in the lower-cost states are far more likely to vote for Republicans.”
But it’s not just red-state business owners who’d pay more. So would everyday red-state Americans.
“One of the reasons this tax increase is going to hit people in red states is is that it’s a tax on employers,” National Taxpayers Union senior fellow Mattie Duppler explained during an appearance Saturday morning on Fox News. “We know that a tax on employers is actually a tax on wages, and that means low-income workers actually bear the brunt of this kind of taxation more than even a higher-income worker.”
“So if you look at a state where job creation is fairly robust, there’s a lot of opportunity for entrepreneurship, those are the states that are really going to feel the burden of this new tax, because it means every new employee for a business is going to be a big tax liability for that business. I think the obvious consequence is that there’ll be less hiring and less economic activity as a result.”
And all thanks to Warren’s plan.
But is all this coincidental or purposeful? Haskins believes it’s the latter — a purposeful scheme designed to punish her enemies while enriching her allies.
“There’s a reason her proposal is designed to shift costs from some businesses to others: It would provide huge benefits to businesses in blue states while punishing businesses in states that traditionally vote for Republicans,” his column continues.
“Of the 10 states with the lowest average annual employer contribution for a family health insurance plan, eight voted for Donald Trump in 2016. Of the 10 states with the highest premiums – including Washington, D.C. – seven voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, and eight voted for President Barack Obama in 2012, including highly populated deep-blue states like New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Illinois.”
This, he alleged, is proof that Warren’s plan is a purposeful plot by her and her Democrat allies “to punish their political and economic ‘enemies’ while consolidating power close to home.”
All predicated on the guise of fixing so-called inequality.
Meanwhile, the remainder of Warren’s radical proposals — from her wealth tax to her ultra-millionaire tax, corporate profits tax and rollback of President Donald Trump’s tax cuts — would damage the American people en masse.
“The real challenge for Elizabeth Warren is that has said repeatedly that this won’t hit the middle class — and it absolutely would,” Duppler explained on FNC. “It would in the form of this new employer tax. Her wealth tax, of course, would have a huge impact on the stock market, and people who have their pensions and retirement in the stock market would certainly feel that impact.”
“So when Elizabeth Warren says that it’s going to be a targeted tax increase, what she actually means is it’ll be a tax increase on average Americans, and it will be widespread.”
Correct. And even some of the most left-wing, Warren-friendly media outlets, including CNN, have admitted as much — that, specifically, no matter how she tries to spin it, the implementation of her radical plans would require raising taxes on ALL Americans:
Warren has promised she won’t raise taxes on the middle class to finance “Medicare for All” and highlights that people would save $11 trillion — but that’s not completely tax-free. Americans of all incomes would fork over $1.4T more in taxes over 10 years. https://t.co/jKe70HvsFw
— CNN (@CNN) November 8, 2019
But for some inexplicable reason, the senator still refuses to be honest about her own plan.
Latest posts by Vivek Saxena (see all)
- NYC Dept. of Ed chief gets up and flees the scene when town hall erupts in anger over school violence - January 17, 2020
- CNN hosts fume over Martha McSally’s ‘liberal hack’ tough talk, but she says no regrets: ‘I call it like it is’ - January 17, 2020
- Rude Jim Acosta verbally smacked by Trump when he won’t stop interrupting - January 17, 2020