The Republic | azcentral.com Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:17 PM
A new Republican attack ad playing on Arizona radio is an early sign that the Affordable Care Act will be fought over yet again during the 2014 elections.
The ad, which is shaky on some facts, targets U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona and other Democrats across the country, but it could also hurt two of Kirpatrick’s GOP challengers.
The National Republican Congressional Committee claims in the radio ads that members of Congress gave themselves special treatment under President Barack Obama’s health-care law.
“Kirkpatrick voted to keep special subsidies for members of Congress,” says a woman in the ad, which runs until Tuesday. “Kirkpatrick is using our tax dollars to fund her health-care benefits.”
Although parts of the claim are accurate, independent fact checkers and even some conservative media outlets have dismissed the overall argument by Republicans: that it’s unfair for members of Congress and their staffers to receive federal subsidies for their health care if some Americans don’t.
Despite it being signed into law more than three years ago, the Affordable Care Act has continued to be a staple of political campaigns during the past two election cycles.
This time, it appears Republicans plan to highlight questions of fairness and problems with implementation of the law, including the troubled healthcare.gov website where people sign up for coverage.
Democrats plan to tout the benefits of the law, including coverage for people who are currently uninsured and those with pre-existing medical conditions.
Members of Congress and their staffers have traditionally received medical insurance from the federal government as part of their compensation and at a fraction of its cost. It’s the same arrangement federal employees have, as well as the millions of private workers whose employers cover some of their health-insurance costs.
That’s about to change, however, for members of Congress and their staffers who, by next year, will no longer receive federal employee health-care coverage. Under a Republican-backed proposal included in the Affordable Care Act, they will have to purchase coverage through the new health-insurance marketplaces where uninsured people are supposed to buy coverage under the law.
That provision aims to force Washington decision-makers to go through the same experience uninsured Americans will go through when they sign up for coverage under the law — that is to say, a frustrating experience, given recent problems with the healthcare.gov website. But the provision did not specify what would happen to the costs of covering those federal employees typically paid for by the federal government.
The Obama administration decided earlier this year that those subsidies would continue. Otherwise, members of Congress and their staffers would, in effect, face a significant salary cut.
The NRCC says that’s unfair because uninsured Americans who purchase coverage on the exchanges won’t receive similar subsidies — although low-income people will receive help.
Kirkpatrick joined fellow Democrats in voting last month against requiring lawmakers and their staff members to pay the full cost of their insurance. The legislation passed the House but failed in the Senate.
“The employer contribution is a continuation of the same formula used for all federal employees who receive health coverage,” said Jennifer Johnson, a Kirkpatrick spokeswoman. “They are the same for a park ranger at the Grand Canyon, a nurse at a Veterans Affairs clinic or a constituent caseworker in a congressional office.”
Adam Kwasman, a Republican looking to unseat Kirkpatrick, said it is “insulting” that members of Congress and their staffers receive federal subsidies on the exchange.
“I think it’s the height of hubris to believe the American people would not be furious with the fact Washington gets benefits that good, old-fashioned, hardworking taxpayers don’t get,” he said. “I don’t believe in subsidization of the elected class. It’s horrible.”
But Kwasman, along with Republican candidate Andy Tobin, is eligible for a nearly identical “handout” as a state lawmaker. They can sign up for health-insurance plans, subsidized by Arizona taxpayers, that are provided to state employees.
The most popular medical and dental plan costs lawmakers covering their family a yearly premium of about $4,000, according to the Arizona State Senate Accounting Office. The state subsidizes that coverage with about $17,000 per year.
When asked about receiving subsidized health insurance as a state lawmaker, Kwasman said he would “look into changing that rule.”
Tobin did not return requests for comment.
Arizona political scientist Bruce Merrill said most voters won’t take the time to tease out the details of such accusations and whether they ring of hypocrisy, given two of the Republicans in the race are eligible to receive taxpayer-subsidized coverage. Instead, the GOP message of the subsidy’s unfairness is likely to resonate, reinforced by years of reporting on congressional perks.
He also said the NRCC’s strategy makes sense as a response to criticism the GOP has taken over hurting “the little guy” with its role in the partial government shutdown.
“It’s obviously an attempt ... to say, ‘We do care about the average American,’ ” he said.
0 comments:
Post a Comment