Thursday, December 10, 2009

Marriage and the National Health Care Bills

I have known Allen Quist for 24 years. I went to school with his daughter, Emily, at Bethany Lutheran College. I stopped at their home that sad December 1986 when his wife, Diane, and their unborn child were killed in a car accident. Emily and the rest of the Quist children were finishing the gingerbread houses their mother had baked.

Allen served as a representative to the MN state House from 1982-1989. He ran for Governor of MN two times.

I designed the website for Allen's 1994 Gubernatorial race for Minnesota. And throughout that particular political race I came to know how vicious, how leftist, how liberal, and how slanderous the main stream media are.

If you watch the main news channels (NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN) they don't care about truth, all they care about is pushing progressivism, big government and anti-conservatism. These media outlets lie all the time about Christians and Christian and Jewish and other Constitutional Conservatives.

Back in the Wilson Administration, through Hoover, and into F.D.R. the main push of the progressives was that a large centralized government could be the answer to all humanity's problems. They subscribed to population control through many means: birth control, abortion, and the political acceptability of the parents. They sought federal government control over industry, farming, and the means of production. They succeeded with the Welfare State and the Great Society.

Marriage was redefined in Germany and the U.S. in those days in a way that suited the progressives. Many were sacrificed because they were deemed mentally or politically inferior.

Now, come to our time.

Well, many of you know that the institution of Marriage is being redefined to include homosexual/lesbian relationships in our day. Abortion is seen by the progressives as a right given by God.

Now we have this government bill that will force government takeover of the healthcare section of our U.S. economy.

[You need to remember that the Gov. has taken over mortgage loans, the banking industry, and also the automobile industry in the few months that Pres. Obama has been in office. And please read Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago and understand that anyone who looks to government for security and safety can expect the same.]

Allen has looked at the current bills before the U.S. Senate and Legislature. Here is his discussion on how it affects the institution of marriage.

Huge Marriage Penalty in House, Senate Health Care Bills
by Allen Quist

There is a huge middle class marriage penalty hidden in the House and Senate health care bills. The penalty becomes evident by evaluating questions like the following: How much would two single people, each making $30,000 per year, pay for private health insurance if the Pelosi bill was in effect now? The answer is $1,320 per year for both individuals combined (based on the premium limits and subsidies outlined on the charts on p. 3). But how much would they pay for the same level of insurance under the Pelosi bill if they were to marry? Their combined cost would then be about $12,000 a year (the estimated cost for private insurance).

This extraordinary penalty people will pay, should they marry, extends all the way from a two-person combined income of $58,280 to $86,640, a spread of $28,360. A large number of people fall within this spread. As premiums for private insurance escalate, as expected, the marriage penalty will become substantially larger.

Once the income of Americans exceeds 400% of the Federal Poverty Level, there are no limits on the premiums they can be charged, and their premiums are no longer subsidized. The poverty level is much higher for two people living unmarried as compared to the same two people being married. That is why citizens in many cases will pay far more for insurance if they are married. Why should married people be subjected to financial discrimination?

The Senate bill also creates a marriage penalty, in this case by imposing a new tax on individuals who make $200,000 annually but it also applies to married couples making $250,000 each year. This marriage tax on the affluent, however, is just the tip of the marriage penalty iceberg in the Senate bill.
The Senate bill stipulates that two unmarried people, 52 years of age, with private insurance and a combined income of $60,000, $30,000 each, will pay a combined cost of $2,483 for medical insurance. Should they marry, however, they will pay a combined cost of $11,666 for insurance—a penalty of $9,183 for getting married (based on tables at:

This substantial marriage penalty applies to persons on individual insurance, but, as the Heritage Foundation’s Bob Moffit said: “if an employer has a health care benefits package that is 12 to 13 percent of payroll, and they can solve their problem by paying an 8 percent payroll tax [into the Exchange], I think they’re going to do it,” (New York Times, 9-30-09). And Howard Dean said that, “Small businesses with payrolls of less than half a million dollars don’t have to buy health insurance anymore for any of their employees.”(FNS, 11-29-09).

Businesses will shed their employees and health care dollars into the Exchange, but the dollars that are paid back out will be directed only to those who make less than 400% of the Federal Poverty Level. Those above the Poverty Level will receive none of their previous insurance benefits from businesses. For that reason the new system is income redistribution on steroids.

“Household” is defined in both bills as including those who can be claimed as dependents for federal income tax purposes thereby clarifying that adults can avoid the marriage penalty by living together unmarried. The new system provides a huge incentive for doing so.

The bills additionally contain De Facto salary caps. How much would a married couple pay for private insurance under the House bill if their income was $58,000 per year? The answer is $2,088. But what if their income increased by $1,000? Their annual premium would then be about $12,000. The economic penalty for going off the subsidized system is so severe that it will be difficult for people to increase their earnings beyond 400% of Poverty Level. The Senate bill works essentially the same way.

Senior citizens and small businesses have already been identified as big losers in the health care bills. Married citizens in the middle class need to be added to the list.

Health insurance premium costs for two adults with equal incomes if the Pelosi bill was in effect now:
Health insurance premium costs for two adults with equal incomes if the Pelosi bill was in effect now:

Combined yearly Income

Combined premium cost if single

Combined premium cost if married.


















Sources: The numbers on the chart are based on (a) a chart provided by The Committees on Ways & Means, Energy & Commerce, and Education & Labor, October 29, 2009, see chart on p. 3; (b) the current Federal Poverty Levels; see charts on p. 3; and (c) the estimate that two adults would pay $12,000 annually for individual health insurance with average benefits if their income exceeds 400% of the Federal Poverty Level.

No comments: