Please select your state
so that we can show you the most relevant content.
Why is Congress insisting on giving billions to insurance companies and subsidizing premiums for people with incomes of as much as half a million dollars a year?
That’s the question Dean Clancy, a senior health policy fellow at Americans for Prosperity, asks lawmakers in an op-ed at Real Clear Health:
Under this proposal, a 64-year-old couple in Oklahoma earning $500,000 per year would qualify for a nearly $6,000 subsidy, according to a new analysis by the nonpartisan Galen Institute.
The increased subsidies for the well-off are only one of the many wasteful features of the COVID-19 legislation now making its way through Congress.
As with far too much pandemic “relief,” the subsidy boost misses the target by a wide margin.
“The damage caused by COVID is real, but subsidizing the affluent and big insurance companies certainly isn’t the answer,” writes Clancy. “Congress should abandon this misguided approach, enact relief for those who truly need it, and then move on to reforming the broader system with a personal option that puts patients in charge.”
Read more about how the House legislation is wasting taxpayers’ money and failing to focus relief aid where it’s needed, and about Americans for Prosperity’s proposals for a “personal option” to overcome the pandemic, boost access to health care, and make that care more affordable.
Receive email alerts to learn how to get involved