The debate over the pandemic-era enhanced premium subsidies has gone on too long already. It’s now up to Senate Republicans to hold strong in their opposition to these tax credits — and consign this policy to the ash heap of history.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) took to the chamber’s floor last week to voice his opposition to legislation that would extend the pandemic-era enhanced premium subsidies for Obamacare plans for three years. Unfortunately, his wise counsel fell on deaf ears, as all Democrats and 17 Republicans voted for the bill.
“I rise in opposition to $100 billion bailouts for [a] broken system fueled by Democrat mandates,” Smith began. “I rise in opposition to subsidizing insurance plans for wealthy people — any support of the bill ensures subsidies go to wealthy families making as much as $600,000 a year.”
Nothing contained in this blog is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Pacific Research Institute or as an attempt to thwart or aid the passage of any legislation.
Enhanced Obamacare subsidies are gone. They deserve to stay that way
Sally C. Pipes
The debate over the pandemic-era enhanced premium subsidies has gone on too long already. It’s now up to Senate Republicans to hold strong in their opposition to these tax credits — and consign this policy to the ash heap of history.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) took to the chamber’s floor last week to voice his opposition to legislation that would extend the pandemic-era enhanced premium subsidies for Obamacare plans for three years. Unfortunately, his wise counsel fell on deaf ears, as all Democrats and 17 Republicans voted for the bill.
“I rise in opposition to $100 billion bailouts for [a] broken system fueled by Democrat mandates,” Smith began. “I rise in opposition to subsidizing insurance plans for wealthy people — any support of the bill ensures subsidies go to wealthy families making as much as $600,000 a year.”
Read the entire op-ed here.
Nothing contained in this blog is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Pacific Research Institute or as an attempt to thwart or aid the passage of any legislation.