JFLNYC wrote:It's not as hard to figure out as it might seem. Corporations (and by extension, their shareholders) along with the super rich (who are the big donors to politicians) will see an enormous tax break. In order for Republicans to pass such a plan without the Democrats, it has to be done in more or less a revenue-neutral way.
So the Republicans have to find a way to fund those huge tax breaks. In order to make it look like they're not taking money from the middle class to give to corporations and the super rich, they can't just increase income taxes on the middle class. They have to be more stealthy than that. So, first, they propose to eliminate or reduce certain tax breaks for the middle and upper-middle class: namely the mortgage interest and SALT deductions. The fact that doing so will reduce home prices in high-tax, high-housing cost states, which are predominantly blue states not only doesn't trouble Republican legislators, it's a bonus. Current estimates are that the average home price will decrease roughly 13%.
But the proposed changes would not be enough to offset lost revenues, so the Republicans had to find additional ways to fund the tax breaks. Where to do so? Why not look at other, predominantly Democrat and politically powerless groups. First, eliminate the deduction for medical expenses. That deduction is used primarily by middle and lower income taxpayers without adequate health insurance and those taxpayers are usually Democrats or they're Republicans who are too ignorant to know they're about to get screwed.
But even that wasn't enough so, using the same reasoning and delighting their donors (who absolutely detest the idea that their tax dollars are being used for healthcare of the poor, shiftless "others") the Senate Republicans are now proposing to repeal the Obamacare individual mandate, which has broad support among Republicans, rich or poor. After all, what could be good about a Federal Government mandate?
What the less fortunate Republican voters fail to understand is that Republican legislators care less about the mandate than they do about about the part of it they never discuss publicly: Without the mandate the government will no longer have to subsidize the health insurance of taxpayers who otherwise can't afford it. Thus, those taxpayers will no longer be able to afford health insurance (and, no, any modest income tax benefits they receive will not cover health insurance costs) and the young and healthy will, in many cases, decide not to purchase health insurance, driving up the cost of health insurance for the older, less healthy. Current estimates are that 13 million people will lose health insurance over the next 10 years and insurance premiums will increase by at least another 10% above previous expectations. As an added bonus, the Republicans will disingenuously claim that premiums are increasing because Obamacare is not working.
Put it all together and it's the perfect GOP plan: Huge tax breaks to their donors and the claim that they're helping middle-class taxpayers, too -- paid for by decreased home prices (and wealth) for the middle class, increased taxes for the upper middle class in blue states and the less fortunate and sick "others" who their donors detest. And, as an added bonus, they get rid of one of the 3 essential legs in the stool supporting Obamacare, thereby setting the stage for them to claim its failing.
