News Part of the Health Care Bill Almost Certain to be Repealed

[russ_watters]

The measure was adopted in March as part of the massive health care reform law, but only came to light months later when advocacy groups drew attention to the provision. Starting in 2012, businesses will be required to issue 1099 tax forms not only to contracted workers (as they already do) but also to any individual or corporation from which they buy more than $600 in goods or services in a year.

Tax experts say that change would require business filers -- including freelancers and sole proprietors -- to issue millions of new 1099 forms each year.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/12/smallbusiness/baucus_1099_repeal/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=Sbin

So if you buy a computer from Dell, you issue them a 1099. Buy some office supplies from Staples once a month? Tally up your receipts and issue Staples a 1099. Expense your lunch at the McDonalds next to your client's site twice a week? Tally up the receipts and issue McDonalds a 1099.

The repeal has bipartisan support, with separate proposals being put up by both Democrats and Republicans in the past few months, but Congress was busy doing other things and didn't move on the issue.

Two points spring to mind:
1. How did this get into the bill in the first place?
2. This validates one of the concerns of Republicans about the bill: it is so big and complicated that it was just jumbled together and passed without people reading it. I'm sure there are other little nuggets of insanity in it that people are unaware of.

 

[Jack21222]

I really wish there were a "one subject per bill" provision in congress. These huge monstrosities often have unrelated attachments that nobody reads.

If only the Republicans were this concerned about the "little nuggets of insanity" in EVERY bill, congress would be a much cleaner place.

 

[Astronuc]

I really wish there were a "one subject per bill" provision in congress. These huge monstrosities often have unrelated attachments that nobody reads.

If only the Republicans were this concerned about the "little nuggets of insanity" in EVERY bill, congress would be a much cleaner place.

I would like to see a record of who writes what in any bill. If someone authors a provision in a bill, there should be a record of who wrote that provision. Writing of law should not be done anonymously.

In my work, we maintain traceability of all our work.

I also agree with Russ on his comments above concerning the healthcare bill. It was too large and pushed through congress to quickly, and given the economic conditions, ill-timed.

 

[arildno]

I would like to see a record of who writes what in any bill. If someone authors a provision in a bill, there should be a record of who wrote that provision. Writing of law should not be done anonymously.

In my work, we maintain traceability of all our work.
.

It would cause an instant uproar among bureaucrats if they should, in principle, be held accountable for their behind-the-scenes power-wielding.

It would, perhaps, be best if that sort of transparency became institutionalized, but the Sir Humphrey Applebys of this world usually win the day...

 

[jreelawg]

They estimate this provision will generate 2 billion dollars in taxes, from what would be previously unreported income. Sounds like a big hassle, which is the major downside. But, according to business week, the average small business would need to then file about 90 1099's, instead of about 20 a year. I'm willing to bet that a person can file 90 1099's in about 2 hours fairly easily. I'm thinking that the extra cost, or hassle for small businesses, is being hyped up a bit for political reasons. The people who are going to be hurt by this provision, are businesses who cheat on their taxes, and therefore it rewards businesses who don't.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The best bill possible was passed at the only time possible. What many people don't understand is that it was now or never. Many Republicans are still in denial over the need for reform in the first place. The tea party opposes just about everything. The bill had to be passed before the Republicans gained control again. History has shown that the Republicans will never reform health care. It you want to pass major legislation, you need the Dems in control. History has shown this as well.

It is no big deal to modify the bill as problems are found. This sort of thing was to be expected. It was critical to get the bill passed while it was still possible.

Note that even while the country was spiralling into oblivion with the banking crisis, it was barely possible to save the country from the Republican ideology. Many would have allowed the global economy to collapse and stood steadfast against the bailouts.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

They estimate this provision will generate 2 billion dollars in taxes, from what would be previously unreported income. Sounds like a big hassle, which is the major downside. But, according to business week, the average small business would need to then file about 90 1099's, instead of about 20 a year. I'm willing to bet that a person can file 90 1099's in about 2 hours fairly easily. I'm thinking that the extra cost, or hassle for small businesses, is being hyped up a bit for political reasons. The people who are going to be hurt by this provision, are businesses who cheat on their taxes, and therefore it rewards businesses who don't.

Good point.

The problem there is that many businesses cheat on their 1099s as well. I hate doing business with other small businesses as the 1099s issued often conflict with the actual numbers. As near as I can tell, most small businesses cheat.

I just report it as it actually happened and never hear a thing.

 

[Gokul43201]

2. This validates one of the concerns of Republicans about the bill: it is so big and complicated that it was just jumbled together and passed without people reading it. I'm sure there are other little nuggets of insanity in it that people are unaware of.

Most of the changes from the bill will not start to come into effect for at least another year or two. That ought to be enough time for everyone to read through things and purge the remaining nuggets of insanity.

 

[turbo]

Good point.

The problem there is that many businesses cheat on their 1099s as well. I hate doing business with other small businesses as the 1099s issued often conflict with the actual numbers. As near as I can tell, most small businesses cheat.

I just report it as it actually happened and never hear a thing.

When I was running a division in an auction company, I had to deal with clients that didn't want to get a 1099 filed in their name. Some of the most adamant were among the wealthiest of my clients.

Another interesting one was a conservative federal judge with a large collection of antique firearms. He could have come out way ahead had he allowed me to offer the entire collection and make bidders compete, AND paid his taxes after the fact, but he didn't want the IRS to have a clue about how much he was making by selling his collection, so most of his collection was sold quietly in private transactions, as far as I could tell.

 

[mugaliens]

I would like to see a record of who writes what in any bill. If someone authors a provision in a bill, there should be a record of who wrote that provision. Writing of law should not be done anonymously.

If I'm not mistaken, that information is available in the Library of Congress. However, while preliminary and final copies of bills are available online, I do not believe its background information is available online.

I also agree with Russ on his comments above concerning the healthcare bill. It was too large and pushed through congress to quickly, and given the economic conditions, ill-timed.

It was a conundrum, all right.

 

[Astronuc]

If I'm not mistaken, that information is available in the Library of Congress. However, while preliminary and final copies of bills are available online, I do not believe its background information is available online.

Is one referring to sponsors and co-sponsors? I know the names are on bills, but I don't believe the texts/files indicate who wrote what lines or specific provisions in a given bill.

I'm not sure that markups are available either.

 

[gravenewworld]

I really wish there were a "one subject per bill" provision in congress. These huge monstrosities often have unrelated attachments that nobody reads.

If only the Republicans were this concerned about the "little nuggets of insanity" in EVERY bill, congress would be a much cleaner place.

If only. American politics simply does not work like this. In order to get a bill through House, Senate, and the President it has to be loaded with provisions along the way. It's pretty much the way it has always been.

 

[edward]

I would like to see a record of who writes what in any bill. If someone authors a provision in a bill, there should be a record of who wrote that provision. Writing of law should not be done anonymously.

In my work, we maintain traceability of all our work.

I also agree with Russ on his comments above concerning the healthcare bill. It was too large and pushed through congress to quickly, and given the economic conditions, ill-timed.

I think we would be surprised at how much legislation is written by lobbyists and special interests. I was all in favor of SB 1070, Arizona's new immigration, bill until I found out that it was written by the private prison industry.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130833741

The health care bill is too large. Every lobbyist in DC must have been involved.

 

[Hepth]

So if you buy a computer from Dell, you issue them a 1099. Buy some office supplies from Staples once a month? Tally up your receipts and issue Staples a 1099. Expense your lunch at the McDonalds next to your client's site twice a week? Tally up the receipts and issue McDonalds a 1099.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, but its not "if you buy a computer from Dell" its "if your COMPANY buys a computer from dell". I don't run my own business; non-business owners have nothing to worry about.

As for small business owners, how many people/business/freelancers/etc do you think they deal with in an entire year that have business over $600? I can't imagine its that big of a hassle to fill the paperwork.

Another question; how is it now? Is there currently in place another monetary value above which a small business would have to file the 1099? Or is it currently unregulated, where they can sped as much as they want with a given party and not have to submit it, letting those businesses pretty much take income without being taxed on it. (assumung they're dishonest)

 

[CAC1001]

The best bill possible was passed at the only time possible.

You mean the best bill for achieving the Democrats' dream of government healthcare, was passed at the only time possible.

What many people don't understand is that it was now or never.

What many on the Left do not get, who are complaining that the bill "doesn't go far enough," is that it was now or never. In terms of reforming healthcare, it most certainly wasn't "now or never."

Many Republicans are still in denial over the need for reform in the first place.

They are!? Most Republicans I know of very much understand healthcare needs reform, they just disagree with the reform proposed by the Democrats.

The tea party opposes just about everything.

A group that stands for limited government of course is going to be against what is (or what they see as) a massive increase in the size and scope of government power.

The bill had to be passed before the Republicans gained control again. History has shown that the Republicans will never reform health care. It you want to pass major legislation, you need the Dems in control. History has shown this as well.

Republicans have passed major legislation in the past, look at NAFTA, welfare reform, Gramm-Leach-Bliley, President Bush's prescription drug program, etc...

It is no big deal to modify the bill as problems are found. This sort of thing was to be expected. It was critical to get the bill passed while it was still possible.

The problem is that the bill is so large and complex that you will get a layer of unintended consequences, which will then interact and create a second layer of unintended consequences, which may even interact and create a third layer, and so forth.

When these unintended problems begin to occur, and the bill is modified to "fix" them, you will get further unintended consequences that were not forseen. If/when fixes to those are made, even more problems will occur.

 

[WhoWee]

I'm willing to bet that a person can file 90 1099's in about 2 hours fairly easily. I'm thinking that the extra cost, or hassle for small businesses, is being hyped up a bit for political reasons. The people who are going to be hurt by this provision, are businesses who cheat on their taxes, and therefore it rewards businesses who don't.

Don't bet the farm. It's this kind of thinking that creates burdens for small businesses.

There is a great deal of work involved to prepare and file a 1099. At a $600 threshold many of these payments will be from a petty cash account in increments of $10 to $15 per week.

 

[WhoWee]

The best bill possible was passed at the only time possible. What many people don't understand is that it was now or never.

I have to agree with Ivan. The problem is that they did it in such a sleazey way it cost them 60 House seats and Obama's 2nd term - so overall it might be a good thing.

 

[WhoWee]

It is no big deal to modify the bill as problems are found. This sort of thing was to be expected. It was critical to get the bill passed while it was still possible.

I have to agree again - it should be no big deal to modify the Bill - eliminate all of the nonsense and probably make DEEP cuts into the Medicare/Welfare/Medicaid program.

BTW - before anyone posts that somehow I want to take medical care away from needy people - I want to warn you that I'm going to address that nonsense with post after post after post describing abuses - such as heroin junkies driven in cabs across town because they don't like their neighborhood methadone clinic at a cumulative taxpayer cost into the 100's of thousands of dollars. Other examples of people being driven 90 miles (past 10 to 12 major hospitals) each way (and have the cab wait all day) because they want to be treated at the best hospital in the country (at 100% taxpayer expense). Then we have the bi-polar epidemic that is being treated with social security disability, Medicare, and Medicaid.
http://www.allsup.com/about-ssdi/ssdi-guidelines-by-disability/bipolar-disorder.aspx
" Ask if the bipolar disability meets or equals a medical listing. Bipolar is listed under mental disorders. To satisfy the listing criteria for bipolar disorder, a number of variables are considered:

Anhedonia
Appetite disturbance
Sleep disturbance
Psychomotor agitation or retardation
Decreased energy
Feelings of guilt or worthlessness
Difficulty concentrating or thinking
Thoughts of suicide and hallucinations
Delusions or paranoid thinking
In assessing bipolar disability relative to a listing level impairment, the following areas of functioning are evaluated:
Restrictions of activities of daily living
Maintaining social functioning
Deficiencies of concentration Persistence or pace
Repeated episodes of decompensation--each of extended duration
An individual who has four symptoms present from the depressive syndrome list, as well as extreme limitation in two of the four functional areas, would probably be eligible for benefits.
"

I wonder how many unemployed people are depressed about the economy and started to drink a little more than usual - and started to experience some of these symptoms? BTW (again) I've known people with the real disorder - they deserve treatment - far too many people are seeking diagnosis to "get theirs"

 

[WhoWee]

I hate doing business with other small businesses as the 1099s issued often conflict with the actual numbers.QUOTE]

Another thing I must agree with. Sometimes there are problems on the receiving end as well.

 

[WhoWee]

Most of the changes from the bill will not start to come into effect for at least another year or two. That ought to be enough time for everyone to read through things and purge the remaining nuggets of insanity.

Unfortunately some companies have already made adjustments and plan to drop retirees from their benefit plans - due to elimination of a tax deduction.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/10/04/healthcare-for-retirees/

 

[Al68]

I would like to see a record of who writes what in any bill. If someone authors a provision in a bill, there should be a record of who wrote that provision. Writing of law should not be done anonymously.

No, but writing of bills can be. Anyone can submit a bill to congress, anonymously if they wish, and ask them to pass it.

Should a bill that was submitted anonymously be automatically disqualified from consideration? Would that violate the right of citizens to petition congress?

Should someone be held "accountable" for authoring a bill, and/or asking congress to pass it?

Accountability for the contents of a bill passed by congress belongs to each congressman/senator who voted for it. They're the lawmakers, and the responsibility is theirs, not whoever submitted/authored the bill.

In the case of the requirement referred to in this thread, each congressman/senator who voted for the bill personally approved that requirement. We simply cannot allow them to deny responsibility for the laws they pass.

 

[Al68]

I have to agree again - it should be no big deal to modify the Bill - eliminate all of the nonsense and probably make DEEP cuts into the Medicare/Welfare/Medicaid program.

OMG! You want to take medical care away from needy people!

 

[mheslep]

They estimate this provision will generate 2 billion dollars in taxes, from what would be previously unreported income. Sounds like a big hassle, which is the major downside. But, according to business week, the average small business would need to then file about 90 1099's, instead of about 20 a year. I'm willing to bet that a person can file 90 1099's in about 2 hours fairly easily.

I'm willing to bet you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[mheslep]

Most of the changes from the bill will not start to come into effect for at least another year or two. That ought to be enough time for everyone to read through things and purge the remaining nuggets of insanity.

There's a corollary: the more time the foolish aspects are left in place, the more time special interests have to build a fiefdom around the foolishness. In the case of these 1099's, it is a good bet that, say, accountants and tax lawyers are already digging in, offering special "we will do it all for you" services, and making sure legislators know they don't want the foolishness to go away.

 

[Astronuc]

I'm willing to bet that a person can file 90 1099's in about 2 hours fairly easily.

That's absurd! If one has several invoices/bills/payments, one has to verify and document the charges if one files a legal document. Try about 5-10 minutes for a simple 1099 if one has one or two purchases. Forms usually don't fill out themselves.

Our company purchases softwared, office supplies, and hardware from various different companies - and we have several office sites. We'd have to collect the data, do the forms and then verify. One computer is more than $600. Do we file with the computer vendor and the OS supplier. Then the software comes from two dozen or more vendors.

Do we have to file 1099's with the airlines, hotels and rental car companies - and restaurants? It takes me more than 2 minutes to fill out a single expense report each time I travel.

 

[mugaliens]

Is one referring to sponsors and co-sponsors? I know the names are on bills, but I don't believe the texts/files indicate who wrote what lines or specific provisions in a given bill.

I was under the impression that each Congressman's contributions were kept on file. I may be mistaken.

 

[CAC1001]

I have to agree with Ivan. The problem is that they did it in such a sleazey way it cost them 60 House seats and Obama's 2nd term - so overall it might be a good thing.

Don't get cocky on that Obama second term thing, he could very well be elected again.

 

[turbo]

Don't get cocky on that Obama second term thing, he could very well be elected again.

Really! What does the GOP have? Palin, whom nobody trusts, Romney, whom nobody can sell to a blind and deaf neo-con or TP member. His support would span the gamut from A to B.

 

[CAC1001]

Really! What does the GOP have? Palin, whom nobody trusts, Romney, whom nobody can sell to a blind and deaf neo-con or TP member. His support would span the gamut from A to B.

UM...I just said, "He could very well be elected again..."

 

[turbo]

UM...I just said, "He could very well be elected again..."

And I agreed, giving two examples of sub-standard opponents who can get access to lots of money.

 

[mheslep]

Really! What does the GOP have? Palin, whom nobody trusts, Romney, whom nobody can sell to a blind and deaf neo-con or TP member. His support would span the gamut from A to B.

Wiki speculation list:

Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi[37][38][39]
Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton of Maryland[40][41]
Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts[42][43]
Former Governor Jeb Bush of Florida[44][45]
Businessman and radio talk show host Herman Cain of Georgia[46][47]
Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey[48][49]
Senator John Cornyn of Texas[50][51]
Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana [39][52][53][54]
Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina[55][56]
Former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich of Georgia[39][57][58]
Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani of New York[59][60]
Former Governor Mike Huckabee of Arkansas[39][61][62]
Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana[39][63][64][65][66]
Former Governor Gary E. Johnson of New Mexico[67][68]
Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia[69][70]
Former Governor and 2008 vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin of Alaska[39][71][72]
Representative Ron Paul of Texas [73][74] (Draft movement)
Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota[39][75][76]
Representative Mike Pence of Indiana[77][78]
Governor Rick Perry of Texas[79][80]
General David Petraeus of New York[81][82]
Former Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts[39][83][84]
Senator-Elect Marco Rubio of Florida[85] [86]
Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin[87]
Former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania[88][89]
Senator John Thune of South Dakota[39][90][91]
Businessman Donald Trump of New York[92][93]


Intrade list:
#1 Mitt Romney
#2 Sarah Palin
#3 John Thune
#4 Tim Pawlenty
#5 Mike Huckabee
#6 Newt Gingrich
#7 Mitch Daniels
#8 Jeb Bush
#9 Paul Ryan

For that matter, there are soon to be, what, 30 some Republican governors; probably at least half of them are viable.

 

[WhoWee]

Really! What does the GOP have? Palin, whom nobody trusts, Romney, whom nobody can sell to a blind and deaf neo-con or TP member. His support would span the gamut from A to B.

Mitch Daniels looks like a contender.

BTW, what is a "neo-con" anyway? Is it a derogatory term for someone who actually believes that America is a great place? Perhaps it's a derogatory label for someone who doesn't want to follow the slippery slope of Liberalism? Please define.

 

[Gokul43201]

While I can't speak for the sense in which turbo uses the term, in general, it is pretty well-defined: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

 

[WhoWee]

While I can't speak for the sense in which turbo uses the term, in general, it is pretty well-defined: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

Turbo uses the term quite often - he should clarify.

 

[drankin]

Turbo uses the term quite often - he should clarify.

From Turbo I always took it to mean anyone right-wing that he doesn't agree with. Synonymous with.. EEEVIL.

 

[WhoWee]

From Turbo I always took it to mean anyone right-wing that he doesn't agree with. Synonymous with.. EEEVIL.

Actually, from turbo I've thought he was disappointed with behavior from the right - but then has to hold his nose to deal with the left - again, I'd like him to clarify.

 

[WhoWee]

To get back on track...this is one part that REALLY needs to be reviewed - the "Medicaid Tsunami".
http://healthreform.dc.gov/DC/Healt...surance+Options/Medicaid/Medicaid+Eligibility

"“The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” creates a new eligibility category in Medicaid, which will expand access to health care for millions of low-income Americans. For the first time, Medicaid will extend eligibility to all individuals, including childless adults, under the age of 65 who have income up to 133 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL).

Starting January 1, 2014, states must cover everyone who is under the age of 65 and has income at or below 133 percent of the FPL. States will receive 100 percent federal funding (FMAP) to cover newly eligible individuals for three years starting in 2014.
Beginning April 1, 2010, states have the option to submit a State Plan Amendment (SPA) to cover these new eligibles immediately or phase in coverage prior to 2014. Under this option, states will receive their regular FMAP until 2014, at which time they will receive additional federal funds. (Additional information on enhanced Medicaid financing under health reform will be provided in Health Reform Brief #3, Medicaid and CHIP Financing)."

https://www.cms.gov/MedicaidEligibility/downloads/POV10Combo.pdf
A rate of 133% of FPL for 2010 for a family of 4 is $29,326.50 or $2,443.88 per month or $563.97/wk.

http://www.laborlawcenter.com/t-federal-minimum-wage.aspxThe minimum wage of $7.25/hour would permit a couple to work up to 78 hours per week and have FREE health care paid 100% from taxes + plus the (cash payment) EITC (up to $5,036 for the family of 4) at this income level.

http://peerta.acf.hhs.gov/uploadedFiles/EITC%20Newsletter.pdf
http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=215766,00.html

I mentioned the EITC because the program was designed to give back Social Security payments to people who make less than $50k per year (link has exact amounts) AND (common sense) the people who need ss the most - probably fall into this income bracket AND Social Security Disability "Allowable Conditions" have expanded.
http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/pr/cal021110-pr.html

I'll restrain from posting about HUD, food stamps, welfare phones, and utility assistance (which will really need to be expanded if cap and trade passes).

IMO, "Health Care Reform" is the program that links all of the welfare programs together and creates a permanent welfare class.

 

[Physics-Learner]

I really wish there were a "one subject per bill" provision in congress. These huge monstrosities often have unrelated attachments that nobody reads.

If only the Republicans were this concerned about the "little nuggets of insanity" in EVERY bill, congress would be a much cleaner place.

amen, and exact a mundo.

 

[Newai]

I would like to see a record of who writes what in any bill. If someone authors a provision in a bill, there should be a record of who wrote that provision. Writing of law should not be done anonymously.

In my work, we maintain traceability of all our work.

I also agree with Russ on his comments above concerning the healthcare bill. It was too large and pushed through congress to quickly, and given the economic conditions, ill-timed.

The way bills are argued and edited before sent to printing, I don't see how that's realistic. You could have hundreds or more names attached to an individual edit without an understanding of how those changes were rationalized by each person and the group over time.

 

[FlexGunship]

I really wish there were a "one subject per bill" provision in congress. These huge monstrosities often have unrelated attachments that nobody reads.

If only the Republicans were this concerned about the "little nuggets of insanity" in EVERY bill, congress would be a much cleaner place.

The ancient Summarians had codes of laws and rules for each city called "me." It was by the "me" that each city was judged. Failed cities had bad "me" and successful ones had good "me." Babylonians adopted the idea (sic. the Code of Hammurabi).

The goal of the "me" was to give the simplest possible rules for existence. They were usually written on a vertical clay slab or on a large totem or obelisk in the public square. There were no rules found in archeological digs that ever dealt with two subjects simultaneously. Additionally, the rules were laid out so that they could be easily enforced with no ambiguities.

"A citizen shall take 10 cups of water each day from the reservoir."

There were no provisions for the sick, or injured, or chronically thirsty. If you needed more than 10 cups, you went next door to your neighbor, or asked around. If you needed less, then you stored it or traded it away, or gave it it to ACORN.

There's actually speculation that the Biblical 10 commandments were actually Summarian "me" passed to the Babylonians and adopted by the deuteronomic Hebrews.

Easily enforced. No ambiguity. Could be written into a piece of software in two lines. And no one could ever claim it was unfair to anyone for any reason.

Could you imagine if modern lawmakers had to be so clear and concise today?! I couldn't even speculate about how much more straight forward our society would be.

"If you can't make it work in every case, then don't make it a law."

 

[WhoWee]

The battle continues...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_repeal#
"The Senate on Monday rejected an effort to reduce tax-related paperwork for businesses when lawmakers couldn't agree on whether they would make up the revenue the new requirement was expected to produce.

The filing requirement is part of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul but not related to health care itself. It is expected to help the government collect an estimated $19 billion in taxes on underreported income over the next decade, and that revenue has been slated to help pay for changes in the health care system.

Under the new law, nearly 40 million U.S. businesses would start filing tax forms in 2012 for every vendor that sells them more than $600 in goods. Many Democrats who supported the filing requirement now acknowledge that it would create a paperwork nightmare, but whether to make up for the lost revenue has divided senators who agree it should be repealed."

 

[mheslep]

The battle continues...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_repeal#
"The Senate on Monday rejected an effort to reduce tax-related paperwork for businesses when lawmakers couldn't agree on whether they would make up the revenue the new requirement was expected to produce...

They rejected the elimination of the 1099 issue? What a bunch of loons.

 

[WhoWee]

They rejected the elimination of the 1099 issue? What a bunch of loons.

I expect a long and drawn-out - line by line battle.

 

[mheslep]

I expect a long and drawn-out - line by line battle.

Come January maybe. Obviously not from the lame duck session.

 

[mugaliens]

Mitch Daniels looks like a contender.

He's certainly done a bang-up job both reducing the sucking, er, revenue-generation of Indiana while simultaneously curbing spending in order to maintain a balances budget.

Both are something America needs, desparately, in order to weather the current economic crisis.

 

[WhoWee]

The court weighs in...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/13/AR2010121302420.html

"U.S. District Court Judge Henry E. Hudson found that Congress could not order individuals to buy health insurance.

In a 42-page opinion, Hudson said the provision of the law that requires most individuals to get insurance or pay a fine by 2014 is an unprecedented expansion of federal power that cannot be supported by Congress's power to regulate interstate trade. "

 

[mheslep]

Yep:

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution confers upon Congress only discrete enumerated governmental powers. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the states respectively, or the the people. See U.S. Const. amend. X; ...

On careful review, this Court must conclude that Section 1501 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - specifically the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision - exceeds the constitutional boundaries of congressional power.

http://global.nationalreview.com/dest/2010/12/13/4f41b71ebfb74ab3c4fd5d896770b6c0.pdf

So far no injunction order though.

 

[WhoWee]

This might belong in a different thread (something about Medicaid waste) but I think it's relevant to this discussion as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/nyregion/12medicaid.html?_r=2

"Until five years ago, when his wife, Wen Mei Hu, racked by bone-marrow cancer, had to be put in a nursing home, where the bills ran past $100,000 a year, threatening to quickly drain the couple’s life savings of $500,000. The nursing home told him not to worry: If he signed a document essentially refusing to support his wife of several decades, Medicaid, the federal insurance program for the indigent, would pick up the bill."

"Last year, more than 1,200 people in New York City officially turned their backs on their husbands and wives to qualify for Medicaid, triple the number of people five years ago. The practice, known as “spousal refusal,” is becoming more common as the population ages and the cost of nursing care rises — and it is coming under increasing attack by government officials looking to curb ballooning Medicaid expenses.

In a recent report, Lt. Gov. Richard Ravitch warned that spousal refusal could be abused as “an entitlement for the less needy” and urged state officials to rethink it, noting that long-term care accounts for nearly half the state’s Medicaid spending.

Lawyers for the elderly argue the tactic of spousal refusal is legal nationwide, and it is most commonly used in New York and Florida, where 136 people refused to support a sick spouse last year.

Without the option of spousal refusal, lawyers say, American health care is like a ghoulish lottery. Those who need doctors’ care for illnesses like cancer or heart disease are covered by Medicare, the insurance program for the elderly, while those who need more custodial care for Alzheimer’s or stroke must pay for it themselves or dispose of their assets to qualify for Medicaid.

The federal government allows a healthy spouse to keep a house, a car, up to about $2,700 a month in income and up to about $110,000 in other resources. Anything above that must be spent on nursing care before Medicaid kicks in.

Nursing home care cost an average of $123,000 a year in New York City and $135,000 a year on Long Island in 2008, according to the latest available state data, or twice as much as the yearly cost of the most prestigious colleges and more than the income of all but the top 20 percent of American households.
"

Our system is broken and out of control in ways not even being discussed.