It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The great mystery surrounding the historic health care bill is how the corporations that provide coverage for most Americans -- coverage they know and prize -- will react to the new law's radically different regime of subsidies, penalties, and taxes. Now, we're getting a remarkable inside look at the options AT&T, Deere, and other big companies are weighing to deal with the new legislation.
Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill's critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.
That would dismantle the employer-based system that has reigned since World War II. It would also seem to contradict President Obama's statements that Americans who like their current plans could keep them. And as we'll see, it would hugely magnify the projected costs for the bill, which controls deficits only by assuming that America's employers would remain the backbone of the nation's health care system.
Hence, health-care reform risks becoming a victim of unintended consequences. Amazingly, the corporate documents that prove this point became public because of a different set of unintended consequences: they told a story far different than the one the politicians who demanded them expected.
In the days after President Obama signed the bill on March 24, a number of companies announced big write downs due to some fiscal changes it ushered in. The legislation eliminated a company's right to deduct the federal retiree drug-benefit subsidy from their corporate taxes. That reduced projected revenue. As a result, AT&T (T, Fortune 500) and Verizon (VZ, Fortune 500) took well-publicized charges of around $1 billion.
The announcements greatly annoyed Representative Henry Waxman, who accused the companies of using the big numbers to exaggerate health care reform's burden on employers. Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, demanded that they turn over their confidential memos, and summoned their top executives for hearings.
But Waxman didn't simply request documents related to the write down issue. He wanted every document the companies created that discussed what the bill would do to their most uncontrollable expense: healthcare costs.
The request yielded 1,100 pages of documents from four major employers: AT&T, Verizon, Caterpillar and Deere (DE, Fortune 500). No sooner did the Democrats on the Energy Committee read them than they abruptly cancelled the hearings. On April 14, the Committee's majority staff issued a memo stating that the write downs were "proper and in accordance with SEC rules." The committee also stated that the memos took a generally sunny view of the new legislation. The documents, said the Democrats' memo, show that "the overall impact of health reform on large employers could be beneficial."
Nowhere in the five-page report did the majority staff mention that not one, but all four companies, were weighing the costs and benefits of dropping their coverage.
Originally posted by jdub297
Does this mean that "finance reform" and "immigration reform" aren't going to meet with your unquestioning approval?
Surely, if BHO says these are what we need, then we should back them 100%, no?
What is it about right-wing opposition that we fail to see that the federal government should be more in control of our lives than ever?
If the government offers guaranteed income absent work, guaranteed health care, guaranteed home ownership and education, why should we worry about anything?
Originally posted by Aggie Man
Considrering is the key word here. They won't drop health care coverage. That would outrage their employees, crated a strike/mass exodus from the company. I imagine that we won't hear too much more about this story, as the employees hear of this, there will be an uproar throughout the company....enough to scare the executives...and the stockholders.
Waxman’s Unintended Consequences Reveal Intended Consequences
Shortly after the boondoggle known as the health care bill was passed, corporations discovered that the bill had a lot of detrimental factors to it, which, as Nancy Pelosi infamously said, we couldn’t find out until the bill was passed. As such, upon its passage, corporations began taking write-downs due to the elimination, by the new law, of many deductions they had previously been allowed to take.
This didn’t sit well with Representative Waxman, being utterly ignorant in the ways of business, and it got his rather unfortunate nose out of joint. He decided to use strong arm tactics, in his position as Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and demanded various things from corporations, including confidential memos. Egregious enough as that was, he didn’t stop there. Unfortunately for him and his fellow Democrats, there were unintended consequences of his strong arm tactics. They ended up revealing the intended consequences of the Health Care Bill: No more employer-provided health care for you.
Originally posted by centurion1211
Strike? Mass exodus from the companies?
You've got to be dreaming that in this economy employees would do any such thing.
Time for supporters of obama and obamacare to face the reality that huge mistakes have been made - both in November 2008 and earlier this year.
Otherwise, you will in effect be going down with the ship solely for the sake of ideology.
Originally posted by Aggie Man
Originally posted by centurion1211
Strike? Mass exodus from the companies?
You've got to be dreaming that in this economy employees would do any such thing.
Time for supporters of obama and obamacare to face the reality that huge mistakes have been made - both in November 2008 and earlier this year.
Otherwise, you will in effect be going down with the ship solely for the sake of ideology.
What does my support for Obama have to do with my stance?
You know that, to many people, their employee benefits are more important to them that their actual pay.
I stand by my previous statement....which was not politically motivated. I suggest you "grow up" and quit making every debate a political.
When I turn out to be right...and you wrong...you can rest assured that I will not be back in this thread to smear your political ideologies.
Originally posted by DJM8507
Perhaps this is the first step in transitioning our health care system towards a public one? If tens of millions of people lose their insurance and can not afford to see doctors then there would seem to be no choice.
Originally posted by Hypntick
This is something that they never showed in the healthcare debates. This is exactly what every single company is going to consider. Is it more cost effective to just drop coverage and pay the fine? This absolutely sickens me to no end. At the very least they need to increase fines for companies that do not offer the coverage and make them astronomical so it's not viable for them to do without.
Originally posted by DJM8507
Perhaps this is the first step in transitioning our health care system towards a public one? If tens of millions of people lose their insurance and can not afford to see doctors then there would seem to be no choice.