Not Joe the Plumber, but SAHM
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 10-16-2008 - 10:49am |
My Open Letter:
Dear Senator Obama,
I am a stay-at-home mom living in the over $250k tax bracket. I want to ask you why you feel my family is not doing it's part to share the wealth in this country. Our family does well but we also pay taxes at the highest marginal rate. We do not have millions or the kind of lifestyle that would get us access to tax loopholes. We only get deductions for home mortgage interests, state taxes paid and charitable contributions. Last year those three deductions were capped because the government limits the deductions at our income level. In the past we have been stuck in AMT which ensures we do not underpay our fair share of taxes.
Because of our family's income level, our children will not qualify for student loans or other aid. Therefore we must save entirely for their college. We save as much as we can. In recent weeks lost 30% of those savings as well as a decent amount of our retirement savings and the few mutual fund investments we have are under water. The only other asset we have is our family home. We only have one. It would be really tough to sell it in this market, we've lost a large chunk of our equity.
We have never received a stimulus check, yet we do our part to donate to charities we believe in, invest in the market and spend to keep the economy going. And we pay our taxes. There is no question that the opportunities in this great country have allowed us to achieve the American Dream. For that I am grateful.
Your proposals will take an additional 12% out of our annual family budget by increasing the marginal tax rate and increasing payroll taxes. We aren't struggling yet but we will be if your tax proposals pass. We will have to stop or severely limit college savings, with one child only 3.5 years from college and the savings down 30%. Last year we paid enough in Federal Taxes to supply 240 individuals with a Bush stimulus check, similar to the stimulus plan you propose if you are elected (I guess that continuation of the same Bush economic polices is good). I have no doubt that some of what we paid went to wasteful government projects and earmark spending that did not help any struggling families. You say $18 billion in earmarks is not a lot of money to you but 12% of my family budget is a lot to me and my children. I do not begrudge what we already give the government, but I will argue that we are doing our share. I argue we are patriotic and we are neighborly.
We are upper middle class, we are not like your friends, Oprah and Warren Buffet. Our priorities are saving for our retirement, our kids college and paying off our house. We can comfortably do those three things now, though we are worried about the economy like everyone else.
I am a registered Democrat and have always believed in social programs for those who need them. I still believe in them. But I do not understand why when you speak that it sounds as though my family is getting something over on this country. That we aren't doing our part. That we don't pay enough tax. That we don't do enough to lift others up. I say we are doing a lot by not asking anything from the government. I say it is the government that is letting the American people down, not us.
If this economy gets worse my husbands job will be at risk. We could lose our home along with the remainder of our savings. The only good news I see coming from the Democrats is that maybe then we can have the government contribute to our children's college education, we'll get a tax cut and might finally see one of those stimulus checks. Then you'd finally get your chance to lift my family up.
Pennsylvania Mom
http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/

Pages
I don't think so. Everyone files a federal return (or should anyway). You can actually get penalized for not filing a return, even if you make no income.
http://www.lincnet.net/health-insurance-for-artists/frequently-asked-questions
http://covertheuninsured.org/stateguides/english/MI.pdf
https://seca.anthem.com/ratequote/index.jsp
No that is not universally true. There are policies that charge for each family member covered. I know because I have one.
<>
I just wanted to reply to your question b/c I noticed it had gone unanswered. Here's an article that discusses one of the biggest concerns regarding McCain's heath care plan. It also answers your question.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/nj_20081011_2605.php
The Real Risk Of McCain's Health Plan
It's not the taxes -- it's the erosion of risk-sharing between the healthy and the sick.
by Ronald Brownstein
Saturday, Oct. 11, 2008
Chrissy
mom to Aidan 8/21/03
Grayson Blaine 12/30/07
No, it's a fully refundable credit so that means you can get money back for it even if you didn't pay income tax.
>>>My husband and I were covered by employer sponsored health plans (costing us about $6000 per year) for many years before we actually needed health coverage. Mr. McCain wants to destroy that sort of insurance, leaving those of us with "preexisting conditions" to duke it out with the health insurance companies on our own. Thanks, but no thanks.<<<<
The reason pre-existing conditions are covered now is because your employer requires it. Although I always believed as long as I never had a gap in coverage I'd be okay, I'll have to look into that. McCain would have you buying insurance in groups, like you could have a group formed to buy a plan for single mom's, or whatever, as a group you'd have buying power similar to an employer. The big difference being that this coverage does not go away when you change jobs (COBRA only lasts so long) and you can shop around anywhere vs. the 1-2 plans your employer may offer you now.
Some believe the employer system is not sustainable in the long run because not all employers offer it, not all employers offer good plans, your employer might not offer a plan that is right for you, and people change jobs and are regularly faced with switching plans even if the one they had was good and did work for them. McCain's plan doesn't take away your employer provided plan, but it does give you other options if you want them or if you don't have an employer that provides insurance.
Pre-existing conditions from McCain's site:
"John McCain believes that no American should be denied access to quality and affordable coverage simply because of a pre-existing condition. As President, John McCain will work with governors to develop a best practice model that states can follow – a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP – that would reflect the best experience of the states to ensure these patients have access to health coverage. There would be reasonable limits on premiums, and assistance would be available for Americans below a certain income level." http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm
Pre-existing conditions from Obama's site:
"Require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions so all Americans regardless of their health status or history can get comprehensive benefits at fair and stable premiums." http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
This is great, but it's going to cost the government money. Private companies aren't going to take huge losses by covering high risk individuals putting the stability of the company on the line. Encouraging or forcing private industry to do things that don't make sound business sense is what got us into the mortgage crisis costing the government and us hundreds of billions of dollars.
Similar to how Obama plans to reimburse companies who's premiums have gone up due to catastrophic losses (see detailed plan on his site) he would need to agree to reimburse insurance companies directly if the person gets their insurance directly. I have no problem with this on principal, but I think it means it's very similar to what McCain says above, you have to come up with a new model and work with the industry to have a plan they will be okay with. You can't just pass a bill requiring this of private companies.
An analogy would be telling auto insurers they couldn't charge a 19 year old male new driver a higher rate than a 43 year old man who had never had an accident.
http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
Just thinking here, how is it that young, healthy people wouldn't opt out of employer provided plans for Obama's "affordable" national exchange plan? Wouldn't that cause the same problem?
From Obama's site: "Establish a National Health Insurance Exchange with a range of private insurance options as well as a new public plan based on benefits available to members of Congress that will allow individuals and small businesses to buy affordable health coverage."
Isn't this national exchange, "national" and not something done at the state level? I don't think there is enough info in Obama's detailed plan but he does say this is the same deal you get when you are a member of Congress - and they don't all live in the same state. He said you can keep this same exchange insurance if you change jobs - well is that true if you move across state lines? A lot of people live near a state boarder, and can change jobs to one in the next state without moving, or move to the next state without changing jobs.
http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
I would rather keep the plan I have now...than risk the employer not providing insurance..paying more taxes than I can afford....and then having to search through hundreds of plans to make sure I can get insurance for my whole family if I am left to find health care on my own..not only that...but finding decent family coverage that is affordable. We have a family history of high blood pressure and heart failure...and cancer. So I have to then go through health plans line by line and see who covers what....if we have a family history will they cover us? DO I have to take a physical? Does my family? If my provider is out of state....who do I go to for claims? Is the company reputable? Whiel I am sure this plan would be great for those who are not sick often...or have no family to insure.....I really don't think this plan would be right for my family. My mother has a health savings plan...as her employer took away the other health care options they used to offer. SHe is afraid to go to the doctor now...wondering how much they will charge if she needs a test....how much for medication. She can only save so much...and now she won't go to the doctor when she needs to out of fear of how much it is costing her. I am sure HSP's work great once you dump a ton of money into them.....until then...they are not much help. More to the point....I would rather take a chance with Obama's plan as i know it...than risk McCain's plan. McCain's plan as I see it would not benfit me or my family. But I am sure there are some people out there who would fare better with it. To each their own.
<>
Exactly.
<>
I am personally more in favor of a "single payer" system of the sort that several Canadian friends tell me works well. But that isn't one of the options. Health insurance is a business, and those companies actually have no interest in the health of my family except in terms of their bottom line.
Given that this isn't going to happen here, we have to work with what we have.
<<"Require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions so all Americans regardless of their health status or history can get comprehensive benefits at fair and stable premiums." http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
This is great, but it's going to cost the government money.>>
But I already have that, and it hasn't cost the government any money. Maybe we should leave the parts of the system that are working intact, rather than actively working to dismantle them, which is what the McCain plan does to employer sponsored health insurance.
<>
I don't think there's anything that prevents people from forming such groups now.
Frankly, I don't have the time to research and join the appropriate "group". Who is going to pay to organize the group so that it has appropriate clout? The government? Me? My employer already does that work. That's one of the reasons we chose our employer. And we have the right to decline health insurance if it doesn't please us. We have the option of paying thousands of dollars more for less coverage in the free market right now.
This line from Mr. McCain's plan:
<>
doesn't tell me anything. He's not saying that that my premiums won't rise under his plan. What he thinks is "reasonable" is anybody's guess.
Yes, thank goodness that currently
Pages