Large and Mid-Size Corporate Heath Insurance Bill

[Democratic Hawk]

However, I am compelled to ask what the constitutional justification for this legislation is, in particular section 1 (section 2, being a tax break, is IMO justified). Certainly it would have been justified under the Public Interest Amendment as a protection of those in employment, but the Senate in it's infinitesimal wisdom rejected that proposal.

It would indeed be ironic, were the Public Interest Amendment to have been the only constiutional justification for this Bill, given that Brian voted against it

Why some progressive, and pro-environmentalist. Senators didn't support that Amendment, makes my blood boil. I argued there and then that it was not unreasonable providing it was used wisely

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Why some progressive, and pro-environmentalist Senators didn't support that Amendment, makes my blood boil. I argued there and then that it was not unreasonable providing it was used wisely

(Emphasis added)

That could be said of a lot of ideas, such as Communism, Fascism, Sharia, Imperialism, ...

The likes of Communism, Fascism, Sharia, Imperialism, ..... never even occured to me. This is Atlasia after all

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

First, of all, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator Brian's Bill is well intentioned but I do have serious concerns as to its practicality. As for the consitutional dimension, I'll leave that to the experts

As you know prior to my election to the Senate, I headed a multi-million dollar family business, the Gray Plantation Company, which prided itself on being a good employer. I can't really call it my company anymore since I now only own 15%. The company does, indeed, contribute 50% towards the cost of its employees health insurance, in addition to which it has a Healthcare Benevolent Fund (totally financed by my family at personal cost to themslves). As a company not since the Great Depression have we ever had to lay off employees and we continue to thrive. This is in no small part down to good employment practice. We value our employees very much and in return we have their hard work and respect

However, this is an entirely voluntary action on the part of the Gray family; unfortunately, not all companies are as socially conscious as what we are and I do fear that added costs could lead to employees being laid off and that would only serve to stifle economic growth and increased dependency on welfare - and that is something, over hell and high water, I'm in the game to avoid

Therefore, it might be better if we:

1) Possibly sought to encourage Voluntary Large and Mid-Size Corporate Health Insurance Schemes - whereby each company or a conglomoration of companies have their own qualified health insurance plans by, possibly, offering favorable tax incentives for all corporations party to such schemes
2) Seriously thought about tackling spiralling health costs through tort reform or other measures

Not allowing for the FY 2007, the Health and Human Services Budget, from 1990 to 2006, has increased by around 273%. Serious attempts must be made at reducing costs. If we keep costs down, we keep insurance premiums down, and everyone's a winner. Make know mistake about it's the increase in health insurance premiums, which are causing thousands and thousands of Atlasian families forfeiting their insurance simply because they can no longer afford too financially

Personally, I believe that individuals, business and government all bear some moral responsiblity to see to it that all Atlasians receive good quality and affordable healthcare. The issue is to what extent

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

Also, the idea of giving tax breaks to companies that do contribute to their employee's health care is also a poor one. It simply is a backdoor way of government funding an often convuluted and excessively bureaucratic system without "really" funding it.

I think given the need to make healthcare insurance more accessible to those who can't adequately afford it, we should be exploring a range of options.

I will consider anything that goes along the lines of nurturing and encouraging employers, voluntarily, to take a bit more responsibility for their employees healthcare. I honestly think its an issue, where Atlasians can work together to achieve a greater good. The fact remains health costs are spiralling out of control. It's a situation where government, business and individuals, and possibly the labor unions, need to work together on

We're are the wealthiest nation on God's green Earth and the fact that millions of Atlasians are without health insurance is a terrible indictment on our times. It's by no means only government that has moral obligations to do what is for the best when it comes to the well-being of the people

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

I agree with your first and last paragraphs, however, the way to provide health insurance to all these people is not by forcing companies to pay for it. I reiterate, why should the government force businesses to do what they refuse to do?

I wouldn't say nurturing and encouraging companies to take more of a responsilibity in the provision of health insurance is quite the same as forcing them too, as in mandating them by law

'Hawk'

[Democratic Hawk]

I can't vote without explaining the reasons why I must vote in the way I have decided.

There is no doubt in my mind that my learned colleague Senator Brian's Bill is well-intentioned but given the mandatory nature of it in that it would impose additonal costs on business, I fear that employers will use this as a reason, or worse still an excuse, for laying off staff, and that is something I don't want to see happen; therefore, I vote Nay . Probably the toughest vote I've had to cast thus far

'Hawk'