ADVERTISEMENT

Harris proposed middle class tax increase for ‘Sanders-lite’ health care plan!

RicoSuave102954

HB Heisman
Jul 17, 2023
7,020
5,220
113
Montezuma, Iowa
During Vice President Kamala Harris’ run for president in the 2020 election cycle, the then-California senator proposed a new health care plan that had potentially high costs for the American middle class.

An archived version of Harris’ campaign website reviewed by Fox News Digital details her "Medicare For All Plan," which Harris, who personally authored the proposal, promised would provide "comprehensive health insurance that covers every American."

Harris cited fellow presidential primary rival Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders' Medicare For All plan as the model for how to pay for her plan, with the then-California senator specifically pointing to an "income based premium paid by employers, higher taxes on the top 1%, taxing capital gains at the same rate as ordinary income, among others."

Harris also provided a link to the Sanders plan, which included a 7.5% payroll tax increase for employers and a 4% increase in income taxes on households making over $29,000.

However, the proposed 7.5% bump to employer payroll taxes and 4% tax hike on households over $100,000 was panned by critics.

Thomas Savidge, a research fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research, told Fox News Digital that any payroll tax increase to employers is likely to be passed on to employees in the form of lower wages.

"The cost of payroll tax increases are ultimately borne by employees," Savidge said. "Increases in payroll taxes on employers take money away that could have been used to increase employee pay, offer better benefits, or hire additional staff."

Savidge noted that the 4% increase in income taxes would cover a large percentage of the American middle class and would be especially harmful in the current economic environment, where concerns over inflation already have many tightening their belts and spending less.

According to U.S. Census Bureau data, over 37% of U.S. households make over $100,000 and could be impacted by the tax, representing a large chunk of middle-class workers.

Savidge also argued that the Harris proposal represents the most "extreme" way to tackle American concerns over the cost of health care, noting that such a plan would distort the market while having significant impacts on wait times and quality of care.

"This is an extreme way to go about it," Savidge said. "It’s going to end up making the problems that we have much worse."

Harris’ current campaign website does not yet include her platform, and the new Democratic nominee also has yet to unveil a new health care plan.

The Harris campaign did not immediately respond to a Fox News Digital inquiry on whether Harris stood by the plan or if she would support one similar to it in this campaign.

However, the Harris proposal was slammed by the office of Trump's running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, who the Trump campaign has touted as its "policy attack dog on Kamala Harris."

"After four years of sky-high inflation rushing household budgets, the last thing the American people need is another tax hike from Kamala Harris, Vance spokesman William Martin told Fox News Digital. "Her middle class tax increase would hit millions of households, and has drawn comparisons to Bernie Sanders from this in her own party. There is no place for her weak, failed and dangerously liberal agenda in the White House."

 
"Proposed"?

In 2020?

That you can find if you go to "An archived version of Harris’ campaign website"?

C'mon man.

Yeah, I mean come on everyone. It's such a stretch to surmise that the party of tax increases would actually propose a tax increase. Especially when the member of that party was voted the most liberal in the senate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RicoSuave102954
Yeah, I mean come on everyone. It's such a stretch to surmise that the party of tax increases would actually propose a tax increase. Especially when the member of that party was voted the most liberal in the senate.
So, you don't know that it's true, but you're gonna act like it's true, until you know for sure whether it's true. And if it turns out not to be true, you'll still posit that it could've been true. Got it.

And didn't it turn out that "...when the member of that party was voted the most liberal in the senate." was "voting" from a website that doesn't exist any more?

There's got to be plenty of actual, legit bad stuff that you can find and link that you don't have to go searching through archived web pages to find stuff to hypothesize about and act like it's new or even current.
 
LOL. Dude, you are scared sh*tless of Kamala. This is like the 7th anti-Kamala thread you've started today. Latest polls ain't lookin' so good, eh? LOL.
LOL - There is so much bad news out there concerning 3% Harris that you basically trip over it once you get on the web.

The Polls, the polls will indicate whatever result the pollster wants because they create the questions to get the answers they want.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: MeetTheFerentzes
LOL - There is so much bad news out there concerning 3% Harris that you basically trip over it once you get on the web.

The Polls, the polls will indicate whatever result the pollster wants because they create the questions to get the answers they want.
If I were obsessed with and scared sh*tless of Trump, I could find an article trashing him every 10 minutes and start a new thread on it to make myself feel better. But I'm not. So I don't. Unlike you.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT