Print Email

Fox Vs. Fox On "Massive New Tax" That Only Affects A Small Number Of People

June 29, 2012 5:10 pm ET by Andy Newbold

Lines in the sand have been drawn at Fox.

Discussing the Supreme Court's opinion upholding health care reform legislation, Fox White House correspondent Wendell Goler reported today that a fee for individuals who don't have health insurance would only affect one percent of the population. Goler's report is in marked contrast to his Fox News colleagues, who are claiming the fee is a massive tax on all Americans.

In contrast to Goler's report, Fox has been aggressively claiming that the fee would amount to a massive tax on all Americans.

For instance, Fox News contributor Monica Crowley said that the ruling will lead to "one of the biggest tax increases in American history and a highly regressive tax that is going to hit the poor and the middle class," and Fox & Friends co-host Steve Doocy claimed it creates a tax that is "going to hit everybody."

Likewise, Fox host Sean Hannity claimed that it is "a tax on every single American" and "the largest tax increase in American history," and Fox News Radio's Todd Starnes said it "will force a massive new tax on the American people."

In fact, Goler's reporting is backed up by the facts. In April 2010, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that only 4 million people will face a fine for not having insurance in 2016.

A March 2012 report by the nonpartisan Urban Institute found that 94 percent of Americans "would not face a requirement to newly purchase insurance or pay a fine."

Tags: Fox News Channel, Steve Doocy, Wendell Goler, Monica Crowley, Hannity

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All

- by thaneb (June 29, 2012 5:17 pm ET)
  8 2
  
  Fox is just using Justice Robert's tax analysis to confuse. It's what they do. Either that or they're stupid.
  
  Reply Report Abuse
  - by WilliamP (June 29, 2012 5:19 pm ET)
    6 1
    
    That 'or' is inclusive. They're a bit of both...
    
    Reply Report Abuse
  - by pete x tp (June 29, 2012 6:13 pm ET)
    4 1
    
    Anything that prevents them from having to admit that they and CNN got the story wrong in the interest of running with a scoop. At least CNN is claiming they are investigating what went wrong. Still not a peep about the FAUX "zero tolerance" policy.
    
    Reply Report Abuse
- by worrierking (June 29, 2012 5:17 pm ET)
  11 1
  
  Every insured person in America already pays a massive tax. People without issuance don't go to a doctors visit for $100. They go to the ER which costs $1,000.
  
  Who the f u c k do they think pays the bill for the people using the ER for their primary care? We're already providing healthcare to everyone except it's very expensive and it isn't used until the medical problem is serious.
  
  I can't be the only one who knows quite a few people who are against the ACA yet it will benefit their kids and grandkids. What the hell is wrong with this country?
  
  Reply Report Abuse
  - by bintx (June 29, 2012 5:24 pm ET)
    10 2
    
    Oh, without insurance, my visits to my specialist were over $200 each (the first visit was $500.00). The co-pay for insured people is $25.00.
    
    The bill for the recommended, short-term, radiation therapy I received was $56,000.00. If I'd had the PCIP insurance BEFORE I had the therapy, it would have cost me no more than $6,000.
    
    Reply Report Abuse
    - by bintx (June 29, 2012 5:29 pm ET)
      9 2
      
      Oh, and that $6,000 would represent my entire out-of-pocket expense for the year. The premiums are a bit steep, but NOTHING like the premiums for the state risk pool insurance. Under the state risk pool, I would have been responsible for $21,000.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
    - by bintx (June 29, 2012 5:29 pm ET)
      5 2
      
      Oh, and that $6,000 would represent my entire out-of-pocket expense for the year. The premiums are a bit steep, but NOTHING like the premiums for the state risk pool insurance. Under the state risk pool, I would have been responsible for $21,000.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
      - by mary59 (June 29, 2012 9:32 pm ET)
        5
        
        Thanks for telling your story. Hope it sinks in to some folks.
        
        Reply Report Abuse
        
        by bintx (July 01, 2012 2:35 pm ET)
        
        It won't. Believe me.
        
        Reply Report Abuse
  - by David2012 (June 30, 2012 5:27 am ET)
    1
    
    Exactly. If we're fortunate enough to be healthy at the moment, we'll all, and I mean each and every one of us, libertarians included, pay the bills of the less lucky. I don't have any problem with that. If they're sick or dying, and I'm not, I'm willing to kick in. Someday, regrettably, they will for me, too.
    
    Although I'm sure, as Saroyan is supposed to have said, that I have always believed that an exception will be made in my case.
    
    Reply Report Abuse
  - by liberalpropaganda (July 01, 2012 2:45 am ET)
    4
    
    We don't like socialism.
    
    Reply Report Abuse
    - by michael3ox (July 01, 2012 2:51 am ET)
      1
      
      Lets see you define socialism. No peeking.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
    - by michael3ox (July 01, 2012 2:51 am ET)
      1
      
      We don't like fascism.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
    - by motorcity (July 01, 2012 5:30 am ET)
      
      So move to Canada.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
    - by Johaely (July 01, 2012 5:47 am ET)
      1
      
      Compelling argument you make there.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
    - by bintx (July 01, 2012 2:38 pm ET)
      1
      
      This isn't socialism. It wasn't socialism when this program was created and proposed by The Heritage Foundation (a conservative think tank) in the 90s, right down to the individual mandate, or when Mitt Romney signed it into law in Massachusetts, right down to the individual mandate. It's about personal responsibility.
      
      What changed that made this conservative insurance reform plan "socialism"? The law is virtually the same, so, tell me what changed?
      
      (I know, but I just want you to tell me.)
      
      Reply Report Abuse
- by dave (June 29, 2012 5:18 pm ET)
  1 16
  
  I don't know about the tax aspect, but from every health insurance CEO that's been on the air, you can expect your premium to rise.
  
  Reply Report Abuse
  - by bintx (June 29, 2012 5:24 pm ET)
    11 2
    
    You could expect your premium to rise anyway, dave. Oh, and what "air" are you watching?
    
    Reply Report Abuse
    - by Old_Benjamin (June 29, 2012 5:31 pm ET)
      14 1
      
      You could expect your premium to rise anyway
      In idiot dave's world there was never a rise in premiums before "obamacare". That's also the world where a sicko like him gets off on watching people being tortured.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
      - by Andy Kreiss (June 29, 2012 8:56 pm ET)
        8 1
        
        Duhhhh... the man on the teevee makes a lot of money in the healthcare industry, and was invited by Fox to come on and give his take. I like the man on the teevee!
        
        Reply Report Abuse
        
        by mary59 (June 29, 2012 9:35 pm ET)
        9 1
        
        My friend Susan was lied to by her insurance company just this week. She's always had a free annual physical under her insurance, and this time they told her they had to charge her for blood work because of the Affordable Care Act.
        
        They picked the wrong person to lie to. Susan is our Democratic House District Chair, and knows how to raise holy h*ll when needed. But, how many other people will believe them?
        
        Reply Report Abuse
        
        by grmce (June 30, 2012 12:27 pm ET)
        2
        
        The typical lying excuses that people use to justify the unjustifiable.
        
        Reply Report Abuse
  - by Adendrools (June 29, 2012 5:31 pm ET)
    9 1
    
    Hey I heard from Newt we'd have a base on the moon. I heard it it must be true...........Really Dave?
    
    Reply Report Abuse
  - by danielsangeo (June 29, 2012 5:37 pm ET)
    10
    
    But health insurance companies are required to pay 80/20. Anything more and they have to refund their customers. Raising the premium will result in larger refunds.
    
    Reply Report Abuse
    - by bintx (June 29, 2012 5:44 pm ET)
      7 1
      
      Exactly. I think the refunds are due to be sent out in August.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
    - by motorcity (June 29, 2012 5:49 pm ET)
      13
      
      The 20% for overhead is pretty generous, considering that the government manages to run Medicare with only about 3% overhead.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
  - by pete592 (June 29, 2012 5:46 pm ET)
    5
    
    As if it hasn't been rising? Where the hell have you been?
    
    Reply Report Abuse
  - by n'est-ce pas (June 29, 2012 10:17 pm ET)
    3
    
    Okay, one more time for the nosepicker in the back: One of the elements of the PPACA was a cap on medical loss ratio. If a health insurance company raises their premiums and fails to spend the extra money on actual healthcare, they will be required to refund their extra profits to their subscribers. Also, health insurance commissioners in every state have the authority to review and reject unreasonable rate increases. So, no, dave. Just...no.
    
    Reply Report Abuse
  - by highlyunlikely (June 30, 2012 2:16 am ET)
    3
    
    depends on who "you" are, Mr. Soulless Cretin.
    
    Reply Report Abuse
- by bintx (June 29, 2012 5:19 pm ET)
  10 1
  
  Every Foxbot I know is repeating this bilge.
  
  Reply Report Abuse
- by magnolialover (June 29, 2012 5:45 pm ET)
  6 2
  
  Except, of course, the "massive" tax isn't that massive (penalty if you have to pay it), and they have weakened the bill so much that if you choose not to pay it, the consequences are going to be... Meh. Nothing.
  
  There are no criminal penalties for non payment.
  
  Reply Report Abuse
  - by dave (June 29, 2012 7:17 pm ET)
    2 10
    
    I have heard that, too. There is no reason for an employer not to drop the insurance and simply pay the fine. It's cheaper.
    
    Reply Report Abuse
    - by motorcity (June 29, 2012 7:50 pm ET)
      12 1
      
      That doesn't make sense. Employers weren't compelled to provide heatlh insurance before ACA. They could drop the coverage at any time without a fine. Why would they decide to do so now?
      
      Reply Report Abuse
    - by n'est-ce pas (June 29, 2012 10:19 pm ET)
      6
      
      Yeah, dave, you're really striking out here. It was even CHEAPER before there was a fine. The reason why employers won't opt out is the same reason they had before, no employer who fails to offer health insurance will find quality applicants willing to work for them. Idiot.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
    - by magnolialover (June 29, 2012 11:37 pm ET)
      6
      
      There is one big reason I can think of. Healthy employees are more productive employees. You want to make more money and get loyalty from your employees? Treat them well.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
      - by grmce (June 30, 2012 12:23 pm ET)
        
        First rule of productivity.
        
        Reply Report Abuse
    - by danielsangeo (June 30, 2012 2:56 am ET)
      1
      
      The employer that drops the insurance will find themselves losing employees and revenue.
      
      Reply Report Abuse
- by What Happened to Gannon (June 29, 2012 10:48 pm ET)
  2
  
  The lie about the penalty would be massive is squawked all over the place by the right wing media, while the truth yet again languishes in obscurity. Thanks for nothing, MSM.
  
  Reply Report Abuse
- by grmce (June 30, 2012 12:20 pm ET)
  1
  
  The pathetic binary reasoning of these cretins came to the fore when I heard a bunch of talking heads going on about "Is it a penalty or is it a tax?" Any intelligent reading of the matter tells you that it is a penalty tax - a tax you pay as a penalty when you fail to purchase healthcover pursuant to the act.
  
  Do I need to write it in bigger characters with extra space in between words? The bears of very little brain have come out of hibernation.
  
  Reply Report Abuse
  - by motorcity (June 30, 2012 2:06 pm ET)
    1
    
    Do I need to write it in bigger characters with extra space in between words?
    
    Might need crayons and very wide spaced lined paper. That, or act it out with sock puppets.
    
    Reply Report Abuse