Democrat Political Posturing on Members of Congress’ Health Coverage
There have been various articles in the past several weeks about an ongoing Democrat campaign to force Members of Congress who oppose the health care law not to accept “health care plans funded by the government.” There are however several points which this political campaign does not mention.
The first, and most obvious, is that Members of Congress who enroll in an FEHB plan are doing so as part of their benefits package – hence the name Federal EMPLOYEE Health Benefits program. The current FEHB is no different from the health coverage provided by any private employer – federal employees choose from a series of private plan options (none of which is run by the government), and receive a subsidy from the federal government acting in its role as an employer.
But there are two additional questions that Democrats who wish to criticize Republicans on this issue should answer:
- Why did Democrats expand Medicaid, while refusing to participate in it themselves? The health care law expanded Medicaid to an estimated 18 million new Americans, NONE of whom will have a choice of private plans, as they will be dumped into Medicaid, a program notorious for its access problems (and which in Arizona now doesn’t cover organ transplants). Yet in March, all Senate Democrats voted against an amendment enrolling Members of Congress in the Medicaid program. If Democrats think Medicaid is good enough for 18 million low-income beneficiaries, why did they vote against joining the program themselves?
- Will Democrat Members of Congress use their own salaries to pay any fines assessed because their employees have “unaffordable” health coverage? The health care law includes a $2,000 per worker penalty for any employer that does not provide “affordable” coverage beginning in 2014. Many junior Capitol Hill staff have incomes below 400 percent of the federal poverty level ($43,320 for a single person, or $88,200 for a family of four), and thus could be subject to the new statutory test of whether or not their health insurance options are “affordable.” While it’s unclear how this particular provision of the law will be implemented for Capitol Hill staff, due to the “significant unintended consequences” of sloppy drafting, it’s entirely possible that Member offices could be assessed a $2,000 penalty for every low-income worker needing health insurance subsidies because they have no “affordable” alternative. If that scenario happens, will Democrat Members of Congress who voted for the law pay the penalty themselves, out of their own salaries, or will they rely on taxpayer funds from other sources to finance an obligation they imposed on themselves?