Saturday, October 3, 2009

In his Sept. 27 Sunday Opinions column, "Health Reform Collides with Labor's Cadillac," Charles Lane wrote that the tax exclusion for health benefits for middle-class union members "encourages more consumption of costly care." But he offered not a single piece of evidence for that assertion. In fact, there is not a single reputable study that suggests that workers who have good insurance overuse or abuse those benefits.

Mr. Lane also erred in suggesting that "practically every serious analyst of U.S. health care says the tax exclusion for employer-provided health benefits distorts the system." The Congressional Budget Office reported in December that taxing these benefits would have a negative impact on workers in "firms that had higher premiums because of the age or poor health of their employees." Moreover, it reported, workers living in high-cost states -- think New York and Maine -- would be hit hard, even though their benefits are not in the same league as the "Wall Street executives and other rich Americans" who, Mr. Lane conceded, "benefit disproportionately" from the tax exclusion.

Finally, he asserted that finding the needed resources from wealthier taxpayers violates "the principle of funding health-care reform out of health-care savings." Who made up that principle? It makes no sense at a time when the income disparity between rich and poor continues to grow.

GERALD W. McENTEE

International President

American Federation of State, County

and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Washington