Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsCalifornia

Expansion of health coverage should start with helping children

George Skelton / CAPITOL JOURNAL

January 22, 2007|George Skelton

Sacramento — The most volatile subjects in California politics today, arguably, are taxes and illegal immigration.

Either or both could trip up Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democratic legislative leaders in their ambitious quests to overhaul California's healthcare system.


Advertisement

Republican lawmakers are warning that they won't support any bill that raises taxes to help pay for universal healthcare or subsidizes medical insurance for illegal immigrants.

Without GOP help, Schwarzenegger and Democrats won't be able to obtain the necessary two-thirds majority vote in each house to pay for a substantial expansion of healthcare coverage.

If the governor and Democrats decree that Schwarzenegger's proposed taxes really are "fees" -- and thus require only a majority vote -- then they will have failed to achieve the necessary broad, bipartisan support to make their healthcare concoction politically sustainable. That will invite inevitable court challenges and/or a ballot referendum to repeal the measure.

That's what happened in 2004. Business interests -- backed by Schwarzenegger -- sponsored a referendum that repealed a Democratic act requiring employers to offer their workers health insurance or pay into a state coverage pool. This time, the Republican governor is advocating a similar "play or pay" scheme.

Schwarzenegger persists in living in denial about his proposed tax increases, apparently spooked by his campaign pledge not to raise taxes. He wants to seize 2% of doctors' receipts and 4% of the hospitals' to help pay for universal, affordable healthcare, and has been spinning it as a "fee."

Now, the governor also is contending that he's merely digging into the medical providers' pockets for a "loan" because, in the end, they'll be getting back higher Medi-Cal rates and more patient business.

"It's not a tax, just a loan, because it does not go for general [spending]," the governor told the Sacramento Bee last week. "It goes back to healthcare. I think it's the important fact here, that you take it for healthcare."

No, governor, the important fact is that you'd "take it." To \o7take\f7 is to \o7tax \f7when you're talking about people's incomes.

And every loan I've ever heard about is voluntary. A forced "loan," it seems to me, is either a tax or a stickup.

Los Angeles Times Articles
|