And if union bosses can purchase the affection of
legislators, why should not GE and ATT&T as
well?
From: Anglo-American Health Policy Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Wilsford Sent:
Wednesday, January 13, 2010 7:01 PM To:[log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Today's
spotlight
To Uwe and others Yes, it’s
both odious and ludicrous. But it’s not new. American politics has
always worked that way. That’s what you get with a very flat, diffuse,
exceedingly open system, which is exactly what the so-called founding fathers
designed with the institutions of the 1789 constitution. In other words,
the system is working exactly as it is supposed to
work. Now, if we don’t like it, then we have to
change the institutions. Just let us not
naively blame the actors within it for acting the way they do. They are
all just being perfectly rational given the longstanding incentive and
disincentive structures at play, set up by these wonderful 1789
institutions. Yours David
> I cannot see how any principled person could support
unionization and > collective bargaining agreements as a criterion for
granting an > exemption from the proposed excise tax. It is not only pure
politics, > but rather odious pure politics. > >
-----Original Message----- > From: Anglo-American Health Policy Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] >
On Behalf Of Adam Oliver > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 11:44
AM > To: [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask] >
Subject: Today's spotlight > > SPOTLIGHT: EXCISING THE
EXCISE? > Union leaders said yesterday that they have reached a
tentative > agreement to exempt collectively bargained health care plans
from an > excise tax on high-cost, employer-provided insurance plans that
is > included in the Senate's health care bill. The deal was struck
between > House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), AFL-CIO President Richard
Trumka, > Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern and
United > Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger. Exemptions for
collectively > bargained plans would mollify unions -- which often bargain
for generous > health plans instead of higher wages -- and would allow
President Obama > to keep his pledge not to impose taxes on people whose
annual incomes > are less than $200,000. Obama has expressed a preference
for the excise > tax over an alternative revenue-raising proposal in the
House bill to > levy a surtax on individuals with annual incomes greater
than $500,000 > and couples with annual income exceeding $1 million. House
Ways and > Means Committee Chair Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) said he hopes an
agreement > can be reached on the excise tax during a meeting today
involving > congressional leaders and Obama. > > Please
access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic > communications
disclaimer: > http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/planningAndCorporatePolicy/legalandComp >
lianceTeam/legal/disclaimer.htm >
--
David Wilsford Ph D Professor of Political Science and Director of Graduate
Studies, Department of Public and International Affairs, George Mason
University (USA), and Visiting Senior Fellow, London School of Economics
(UK) [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask] French cell
+33.6.11.16.50.93 U.S. cell
+1.224.522.0111