It’s ba-ack! Health-care plan redoubles ‘marriage penalty’

Congressional proposals could penalize couples $10,000 for saying ‘I do’

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Bills pending in Congress that would nationalize health care by setting up mandatory insurance purchases and fines for not complying could penalize married couples $10,000 annually and are a direct attack on marriage, families and the church because of their discriminatory provisions, according to a congressional candidate.

“This is as awful, I will say evil … this is as evil as it gets,” Allen Quist, who is running to unseat Democrat Tim Walz in Minnesota’s 1st congressional district, told WND.

Quist said the fine print of provisions still alive in both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives deliberately create enormous pressure for couples to live together without marriage – or even get divorced – by charging married couples thousands of dollars more in premiums and fees.

“And it’s deliberate,” Quist added, “This is clearly not accidental.”

Continue reading at WorldNetDaily.com

… what is even worse is that the subsidies are suddenly and completely cut off once somebody reaches 400 percent of the official poverty-level income ($63,360 in 2016). The arithmetic is complicated, but what it means is that two unmarried persons earning $32,000 each ($64,000 total) would pay a maximum combined $5,684 in premiums, but if they got married, they would pay about $15,000. That is an astonishing penalty of 164 percent. It is almost impossible to imagine a policy that could be any more anti-family than that.

Again, that was for middle-income earners receiving government subsidies in lieu of employer tax breaks for insurance. Now consider a high-earning couple. The Senate bill imposes a payroll tax increase on individuals who make more than $200,000. For married couples, though, the tax increase kicks in at $250,000. So, if you live together without matrimony, you can earn up to $400,000 combined without the higher tax – $150,000 more than you can earn together if you are married. At a maximum of $1,350, this marriage penalty through taxation isn’t anywhere near as damaging as the $9,316 knockout punch via lost subsidies for the $64,000 couple described above, but it’s still nothing to take lightly.

Read the full editorial here. You can also read Quist’s original research publication here.

(Mankato, MN) – First Congressional District Candidate Allen Quist said Representative Tim Walz should vote “No” on any health care reform bill that comes back to the House for a vote. “On numerous occasions Rep. Walz promised to represent the people of the First District,” said Quist. “The voters are overwhelmingly opposed to what the Washington politicians are putting together on health care,” Quist added, “and they deserve to have their voices heard,” he said.

Quist said he rejects Walz’s argument that we have to something, and this means we should pass the current proposals up for consideration. “The ‘do something even if it’s wrong’ philosophy has been rejected by the people here,” said Quist.

A major concern of former Minnesota House member Quist is the huge marriage penalty contained in both the House and Senate versions. “There is no way Mr. Walz can justify discrimination against married people,” Quist said. He added that Rep. Walz has an obligation to inform the public of the shocking marriage penalty hidden in the bill he voted for previously.

“Middle class married persons will bear the brunt of the huge financial burden of this health care legislation,” Quist said.

“Real health care reform,” said Quist,” includes solving the malpractice litigation problem along with more competition and flexibility for insurance companies. People’s free choices, along with genuine competition, will be central features of real reform,” he added.

Quist said that if he is elected this coming November, and if the current health care bill has passed, replacing it with real health care reform will be one of his top legislative priorities.

###