Latest News 
CWA and its allies are assessing strategy for health reform in light of the Republican win in the Massachusetts Senate election. The win denies Democrats enough votes to block a filibuster in the Senate, making it nearly certain that Republicans can block action on the current health reform bill.
"Over the next several days, CWA will continue to work with our coalition partners, other labor unions, and our friends in the House of Representatives to determine the best path for moving forward on any legislation," CWA leaders said in a statement. "CWA remains opposed to the Senate bill as it currently stands and will continue the work we have been engaged in over the past several weeks to ensure that any legislation addresses our members concerns. Until we determine the best course of action, our many grassroots programs around the issue have been put on hold."
CWA remains committed to fixing a broken health care system with a system that provides secure and affordable coverage for all Americans, is financed fairly, controls cost escalation, curbs abusive practices by insurance companies, and improves quality.
– 01/22/10
The American Dental Association and the American Benefits Council, a group which represents large employers, have joined CWA in asking Congress not to tax health benefits.
The Senate included a tax on high-premium health plans in its health reform bill. Congress and the White House are now trying to merge the Senate bill with one passed by the House of Representatives, which does not include a benefits tax.
The benefits tax "would compel many employers to drop critical dental and other coverage to avoid the tax," Dr. Ron Tankersley, president of the Dental Association, the largest professional association for America's dentists, said. "It dismantles exactly the type of preventive, primary care that everyone agrees this country needs more of."
In a letter to Congressional leaders, the groups say that many plans will be taxed not because they offer over-generous benefits, but "simply because the plans include many older workers or retirees with higher cost health care needs, or are concentrated in locations with high health costs."
Joining CWA, the Dental Association and the benefits council in signing the letter were the Academy of General Dentistry, American College of Prosthodontists, American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, American Association of Orthodontists, Guardian Life Insurance of America, Hispanic Dental Association, Service Employees International Union, National Association of Vision Care Plans, and VSP Vision Care.
– 01/13/10
We've been telling you that differences between the House and Senate health reform bills would be resolved in a conference committee. Now, however, it looks as if Congressional leaders are instead using a less formal process - sometimes called "ping pong" - to come up with a single bill.
In the "ping pong" process, the two houses confer informally, and sometimes send amendments back and forth. Eventually, the two houses will have passed the same bill, without a conference committee. The ping pong is already under way; leaders of both houses conferred with the White House last night. The process is expected to take about a month.
For us, there's no difference whether there's an official conference committee or a less formal ping pong match. The point is this: Over the next few weeks, we'll either get a health reform bill that meets our needs or we'll get one with serious flaws.
That means the next few weeks represent our last chance to have our voices heard. CWA is asking us to write to our representatives in Congress, asking them to make the bill as good as possible.
We're focusing on two issues, and, on both, we think the House has the right approach:
- Taxing benefits. The Senate would slap a tax on high-premium health policies. This would hit many of our members and millions of working American families. The House has a better way to pay for reform: a so-called "millionaire's tax" on high-earning individuals.
- Making sure employers pay their fair share. The House bill would require employers (except for the smallest ones) to offer coverage to their workers or pay a substantial penalty. The Senate bill has no employer requirement.
– 01/06/10
The Senate passed a health reform bill early this morning, meaning the issue will go to a conference committee over the next few weeks to resolve differences with the House of Representatives version of the bill.
As the conference committee prepares a merged bill, CWA will be pushing for something closer to the House version, especially on the two key issues of a benefits tax and a requirement for all employers to pay their fair share for coverage.
Benefits tax: The Senate bill contains a tax on health insurance policies costing more than $23,000 for a family or $8,500 for an individual. Employers would cut benefits to avoid the tax, resulting in less coverage and higher out-of-pocket costs for millions of middle-class families. CWA has compiled studies and reports which demonstrate the flaws in the benefits tax. The House would finance reform without taxing benefits, instead increasing income taxes for families making more than $1 million a year and individuals making more than $500,000.
Employers paying fair share: The House bill requires all employers (except the smallest) to pay at least 65 percent of family premiums for their workers or pay a penalty based on payroll. The Senate bill doesn't have an employer requirement, although it does penalize employers whose workers get government subsidies. The Senate version could have the unintended consequence of discouraging employers from hiring workers from moderate income families.
Although the differences are important, the House and Senate bills have many similarities. Each would extend coverage to tens of millions more Americans, by expanding Medicaid for those near the poverty line and offering subsidies to buy coverage to families making as much as $88,000 for a family of four. Both prevent insurance companies from refusing to cover people because of pre-existing conditions or from cancelling policies when people get sick. Both limit the out-of-pocket charges faced by patients. Both would slow the rate of increase in Medicare spending and set up pilot programs to lower health costs and improve quality.
After the Senate vote, President Obama commented: "If this legislation becomes law, workers won't have to worry about losing coverage if they lose or change jobs. Families will save on their premiums. Businesses that would see their costs rise if we do not act will save money now, and they will save money in the future. This bill will strengthen Medicare, and extend the life of the program. It will make coverage affordable for over 30 million Americans who do not have it — 30 million Americans. And because it is paid for and curbs the waste and inefficiency in our health care system, this bill will help reduce our deficit by as much as $1.3 trillion in the coming decades, making it the largest deficit reduction plan in over a decade. "
The conference committee is expected to produce a merged bill in January. Both houses need to vote again on the conference committee bill.
Today's Senate vote again went along party lines, with all 58 Democrats and both independents voting for the bill and 39 Republicans voting against. (One Republican was absent.)
– 12/24/09
CWA released yesterday summaries of 18 studies, reports and analyses challenging the tax on high-cost health plans included in the Senate's health reform bill. The reports come from medical journals, from benefits consultants who work for employers, and from health policy think tanks.
"These numerous reports make clear that a tax on health care plans is the opposite of reform - it will hit middle-class families and working Americans hard," said CWA President Larry Cohen. "The health plan excise tax will not let families keep the good health plans they have now."
The reports show that key assumptions behind the tax are unsupported:
- The tax is described as aimed at "Cadillac" plans with lavish benefits. The studies show, however, that many plans with high premiums have normal benefits. The premiums are high because the plans cover many older or female workers (groups with higher medical claims) or because they cover workers in areas where medical costs are high. Projections show the Cadillac tax wouldn't just hit investment bankers - it would impact tens of millions of middle-class Americans.
- Supporters say because some of us have "too much" health insurance, having employers cut benefits would hold down medical costs. The assumption is that people are using medical services they don't need because their insurance allows them to pay little or nothing. First of all, most of us (even those with high-cost plans) are still facing co-payments and deductibles which make us think before we spend. And the studies show that decreasing benefits - meaning more out-of-pocket costs for patients - decreases the use of necessary as well as unnecessary care. When a patient with a chronic condition, such as diabetes, "saves money" by not taking medication to control the condition, hospitalization and emergency room costs go up, so the savings can disappear.
- Studies show most health costs are for a relatively small number of patients with serious acute conditions (such as cancer) or chronic problems which require treatment for years (such as asthma). Higher out-of-pocket costs would likely do little to impact such big-ticket medical spending. And the out-of-pocket costs did have an impact, it would mean that the sickest people are skipping needed care.
- Supporters of the Senate health reform bill say it will let people keep the insurance plans they have. But surveys of employers show most plan to cut benefits to avoid the tax.
- While employers would cut benefits to avoid the tax, supporters of the tax say the money the employers save would be passed along to the workers as raises. Surveys of employers, however, show they don't plan to do that; workers would be facing higher out-of-pocket costs when they need care, but without the raises that would help them pay for it.
– 12/23/09
Directly challenging a key White House economic adviser, CWA today released a report saying the proposed health benefits tax represents "a significant increase in taxes on millions of middle-class families."
The tax will impact nearly 25 million households - about 58 million Americans - in 2019, including one-fifth of households with incomes between $50,000 and $75,000, CWA said, citing data from the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.
"This new data demonstrates irrefutably that the excise tax - which will result in reduced coverage and increased costs for our middle class families - is the opposite of reform," CWA President Larry Cohen said. "There are other options for funding reform, such as those in the House version of bill, which do not place the burden on middle class Americans. This new data shows that the excise tax is not one of them."
The report takes issue with a blog entry yesterday by Jason Furman, deputy director of the National Economic Council, saying the benefits tax wouldn't hit middle class families and that employers who cut benefits to avoid the tax would raise wages with the money they saved.
The employers themselves, by the way, say they won't raise wages. As cited in the CWA report, a survey by the consulting firm Towers Perrin found 78 percent of employers said they would retain any savings as profits, and only 9 percent said they would increase pay for workers.
CWA's challenge to the White House comments caught the attention of the Washington newspapers Politico and The Hill and the progressive blog Firedoglake.
The CWA report shows large tax impacts on CWA members. "CWA negotiated health care plans are not 'Cadillac' plans offering 'excessive' benefits," the report says. "The benefits in CWA's plans are more like Chevys than Cadillacs as they are roughly comparable to other plans, but provide for more limited cost sharing."
Several recent studies have shown that high-cost plans, which would be subject to taxation under the health reform bill being considered by the Senate, have high premiums generally not because they offer lavish benefits, but because the workers they cover are older, work for a smaller employer or live in regions with high medical costs.
– 12/17/09
Voters in ten swing states oppose a tax on health benefits by a margin of more than 3 to 1, according to a poll by Anzalone-Liszt Research commissioned by CWA.
The poll also indicated political problems ahead for elected officials who support the benefits tax, which is included in the current version of the health reform bill being debated by the Senate. Sixty-three percent of voters - and 68 percent of independent voters - said they would be less likely to vote to re-elect a representative who voted for the benefits tax.
A clear majority in the poll supported an alternative way to pay for health reform, a tax increase on individuals making more than $500,000 a year and families making more than a million dollars a year. The "millionaires' tax" was supported by 54 percent of voters polled and opposed by 42 percent.
"It is clear from the poll that voters have a real sense of what is a fair way to pay for health care reform, citing the overwhelming preference to tax upper-income families instead of taxing health care benefits," said John Anzalone, president of the polling firm.
The poll surveyed 2,200 likely voters in Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota and Virginia.
The results are consistent with those in other polls. For example, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll in October found 69 percent opposed to a benefits tax if the cost would be passed along to workers, with 21 percent opposed. In that Kaiser poll, 63 percent supported an added tax on high-income families, with 33 percent opposed.
– 12/10/09
CWA's President Larry Cohen and Valerie Castle-Stanley, a member of CWA Local 2204, joined with other speakers at a press conference today to attack a plan being debated in the Senate to tax health benefits.
Castle-Stanley, who works at an AT&T call center in Southwest Virginia, said she already spends thousands of dollars a year on co-payments, prescriptions, and other out-of-pocket costs for her family and for the treatments she needs for asthma, which she has had since childhood.
"I need my medications to live," she said. "I support health reform, but I can't afford this tax. For families like mine that are on a budget, the results will be devastating."
"We need to make history, not break the backs of 30 million Americans who would be affected by this tax," Cohen said.
The press conference outside the U.S. Capital was convened by Sen. Bernie Sanders, an Indpendent from Vermont. Sanders and Sen. Sherrod Brown, an Ohio Democrat, are sponsoring an amendment which would strip the benefits tax from the Senate health reform bill, substituting an added tax on families making more than a million dollars a year.
Sanders said while the benefits tax is described as targeted at "Cadillac plans" with rich benefits, in fact it would hit 30 million workers with normal benefits.
Rep. Joe Courtney, a Connecticut Democrat, told the press conference that nearly 200 of his House colleagues had signed a letter opposing the tax, which he said would result in "degrading and diminishing benefits" and post "an additional burden on the middle class."
Other workers, like Castle-Stanley, described the impact the tax would have on them.
"I will either pay extra for my benefits or I will have them reduced," said Gary Willet, a warehouse worker and member of Teamster Local 730 in Washington. "I urge the U.S. Senate to tax those who can actually afford to buy a Cadillac."
Lily Eskelsen, a sixth grade teacher in Utah and a vice president of the National Education Association, asked, "Why would you not look first to millionaires and ask them to pay their fair share before you turn to a third grade teacher?"
James Huber, an electrician in a Baltimore steel mill and a member of United Steel Workers Local 9477 said workers had given up wage increases to get good benefits, but could lose those benefits because of the tax.
– 12/10/09
The benefits tax now included in the Senate's health reform bill would hit federal employees' most popular health plan, according to two reports released this week by CWA and other unions that represent public employees. The reports are further evidence that the so-called "Cadillac tax," described by its supporters as aimed lavish benefits enjoyed by a few workers, will actually impact a large swath of the middle class with decent, but not excessive, health plans.
"This tax is the opposite of health care reform - it represents a benefits cut and a middle class tax increase," said Larry Cohen, president of CWA. "The Senate should look to the House version of the bill for alternative ways to fund health care reform."
The reports were released this week by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), American Postal Workers Union (APWU), and National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) as well as CWA. They were joined at the press conference by Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.).
By the end of ten years, according to the reports, federal workers with family coverage in the federal Blue Cross Blue Shield Standard plan would be hit by taxes of $5,500 a year; those with an individual plan $3,500 a year. Like other employers, the federal government could pass on the tax to workers or cut benefits. Already, nearly two-third of employers said they would cut benefits if the tax is passed.
The Blue Cross Blue Shield Standard plan covers about half of federal workers. Counting dependents and retirees, it enrolls nearly 3.8 million people.
"The excise tax is a direct tax on our members' benefits and will result in a huge benefit cut and increased co-pays and deductibles. We have a no-win scenario here; it's the wrong direction for health care," John Gage, president of AFGE, said.
The benefits tax issue is also the subject of a new blog by Richard (RJ) Eskew, a former insurance executive. It's called "No Middle-Class Health Tax," and it's worth checking out on a regular basis. Eskew also lays out the case against the benefits tax for the Huffington Post.
– 12/09/09
As crucial votes on health care reform near in the Senate, CWA's Health Care Campaign - which has been pretty intense for more than a year - is stepping up even more.
Here's some of what's going on this week:
- CWA President Larry Cohen was among about half a dozen labor leaders who met with key health policy and political aides at the White House Monday. The message from the union officials: Don't tax our benefits.
- Local CWA activists from Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, Ohio, Arkansas, Missouri and California are participating this week in an AFL-CIO "fly-in," coming to Washington for meeting Wednesday and Thursday with their senators and representatives.
- A worksite phone-in campaign, which generated 1,800 calls to the Seante last week, will continue. More calls will provide important back-up for the "fly-in" activists by showing elected officials that lots of voters care about health reform that fixes the system and doesn't tax benefits. Members are asked to call 1-888-580-0792 to be connected with their senators.
- CWA has launched an internet ad campaign, called "a pretty innovative advancement for a union" by the Web site FireDogLake. The ads feature CWA members talking about how they can't afford a tax on benefits.
- CWA's stop-the-health-benefits tax effort launched its own Facebook page. That's in addition to the regular CWAHealthCare page on Facebook.
- There are plans for press conferences, Capitol Hill briefings and the release of several studies. Stay tuned for details.
– 12/09/09
Page 1 of 6 pages 1 2 3 > Last »
