AFL-CIO Chief, Called To White House Over Last Minute Health Care Flare Up

[depakid]

With a health care reform proposal being patched together for final consideration in the House of Representatives, gripes over a key element of the legislation could trip up the delicate process.

On Wednesday, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka was called into an unplanned meeting at the White House to discuss late-stage negotiations on a proposed tax on high-end insurance plans. According to sources familiar with what transpired, congressional leaders had begun discussions earlier in the day (perhaps last night) about accelerating the tax's impact in order to produce more savings under the president's revised health care bill.

Under the president's plan, those families with health care plans over $27,500 and individuals with plans over $10,200 would be taxed starting in 2018. That tax would be indexed to the Consumer Price Index plus one percent, which would provide some additional comfort to those with high-end policies -- specifically for labor workers who had bargained for these plans.

The plan, however, got tripped up after congressional negotiators received poorer-than-expected feedback from the Congressional Budget Office, a senior Democratic hill aide confirmed. And as a compromise, on Wednesday, they began discussing indexing the tax simply to the Consumer Price Index.

"What the White House is putting out is not any big major changes to the deal," said a source briefed on the matter. "What they are talking about is the way things are right now the tax was indexed to CPI+1 and they want to change it to CPI general inflation."

Trumka, who has fought tirelessly against an excise tax, was summoned to the White House to discuss the matter late in the afternoon. Whether the adjustment was agreed to or was enough to endanger the powerful union's support for health care legislation is not yet known.

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/17/richard-trumka-afl-cio-ch_n_503323.html

[vaberella]

1. Okay...no confirmations...just speculations.

Let us know when there is confirmation and what it entails.

[global1]

2. Am I Reading This Right? - The CBO Numbers Weren't Good From The $'s Standpoint So......

they had to figure out a way to get the revenue up to pay for it? Is that what happened?

And I just realized that I'm going to be subject to this tax. My BC/BC right now is costing me over $12,000/year and that is no Cadillac Plan. It is a basic plan with a high deductible - because I'm 61 y/o and self-employed. So it looks like I going to be penalized even more with this tax - at least that's my interpretation. However - if it doesn't kick in until 2018 I will be on Medicare by then.

[FrenchieCat]

3. The tax doesn't kick in till 2013 I believe.....

and you are not taxed, the insurer is taxed.

I believe that Individual insurance isn't included although I'm not 100% sure.

but if you are self insured, you'd be able to shop on the exchange,
to reduce your insurance premiums in that same year that the excise tax
goes into effect.

[Phx_Dem]

4. I'm a little tired of union bosses thinking the world revolves around them,

at the expense of everyone else.

[ljm2002]

5. And I'm really tired...

...of DUers who think unions can go to hell.

Unions exist to protect the rights of workers, and to get the best deal possible. Union workers by and large have good health care deals because the union bargained for that coverage, often agreeing to forego pay raises.

But what the hell, if they can pull the rug out from under retirees' pensions -- which as we know they can, and they do -- then what the hell, why not start chipping away at their "Cadillac" health care plans too.

Well there's a reason that the ruling classes from time immemorial have used the strategy of "divide and conquer" against the masses: it works. You only have to read the posts here on DU that relate to unions. On a Democratic-leaning site you might expect to see solidarity with the unions.

Ha, ha ha.

We have at least as much union bashing here as you will see in a major newspaper's comments sections. I don't know about FR, I never go there. But I'll bet we compare with them when it comes to union bashing, only difference is here it's a bit more "genteel" and never resorts to calling them "union thugs". Or, rarely resorts to that anyway.

It makes me ill.

[high density]

6. Union bashing? Nope. It's more of a desire to not make special rules just for unions.

My parents are in a union and have given up raises for better health insurance benefits. I certainly understand where the unions are coming from. I feel that if there's a problem with the levels of the excise tax, it needs to be adjusted for all US workers, not just those in unions. If Wal-Mart was bellying up to the table and saying it wanted its workers to have special tax treatment, DUers would be frothing from the mouths about it. Question these backroom deals that the unions are doing and it's suddenly "union bashing."

[ljm2002]

7. It is the nature of the arrangement...

...unions represent their members. That is their purpose for existing. Now, I'd be happy if they also publicly stated just what you said: it (the excise tax) needs to be adjusted for all US workers, not just those in unions. But as far as any deals, they can only make deals that affect the unions. If others want to stand up for non-union workers, they can do so. But then again, that is exactly why unions were formed: because no one else was standing up for the workers.

In any case, the unions made above-board deals with employers concerning health coverage. I see no reason, none at all, to accuse them of "back room deals" when they try to get a better deal for their members when their health care packages became a bargaining chip through no fault of their own.

And your example of Walmart bellying up to the table has no merit. Walmart does not represent its workers, so anything they would try to get would not be on behalf of said workers.

[high density]

8. "They can only make deals that affect the unions."

I don't agree.

[ljm2002]

9. So you want the unions to represent everyone?

How does that work, exactly?

[Phx_Dem]

10. I didn't say they can go to hell. Way to make shit up.

I said I'm tired of them acting like the world resolves around them. They do, and it doesn't.