Can surcharges be part of budget deal?

  • Article by: EDITORIAL , Star Tribune
  • Updated: June 21, 2011 - 10:08 PM

They pull more federal funds into Minnesota health budget.

  • 12
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
bernice3Jun. 21, 1110:23 PM

It may be that, in the 19th Century, churches and private charities could scrape up enough money from member donations to care for those unable to fend for themselves. Today, however, it is sheer nonsense to believe that private donations can make more than a goodly dent in the great need that exists. Only government, using the power to tax for the common good, can fund health care for the poor, in-home and nursing home services for the elderly and disabled, housing for the homeless and food for the hungry. Signing the No New Taxes pledge does not make the need go away, it just pretends it's not there and says, "See, government doesn't have to get involved." Wake Up Republicans.

arspartzJun. 22, 1112:09 AM

"The welfare of the people has always been the alibi of tyrants."-----Albert Camus

hobie2Jun. 22, 11 2:16 AM

Let the market fix the problem - this death panels thing is just government meddling in the market. Cut back on aid to the elderly, sick, and poor, and more will die, leaving enough money to go around for those that survive... See, the market will fix it, GOP style...

dandean316Jun. 22, 11 7:15 AM

Strib said: "The now-vetoed Republican bill is $1.6 billion, or 13 percent, smaller than base funding" Again the Strib shows it's bias. The key is the word BASE FUNDING, which are phoney numbers. The Dems wanted a 19% increase, the GOP said, you get a 6% increase. So according to the Dems with help from the Strib, that's a 13% cut. Geesh. In the real world and real numbers, like the people who actually work use, the budget is increasing over 6%. Dayton will shutdown the government, because the GOP is increasing government 6% and that's not enough for him.

dvsdan123Jun. 22, 11 8:45 AM

Dandean, I agree. The entire budget is not being cut, the increases are being limited. I wish the media would call it what it is. "Limited Increases" in the budget.

alansonJun. 22, 1110:32 AM

The surcharges idea may work - it's really a way to shift Medicaid costs to the Federal Government. But the Feds are not unaware of this and so Obamacare will limit the surcharges in a couple of years (the next biennium). So this would be yet another accounting gimmick that will have to be unwound in the future.

jollaguyJun. 22, 1110:55 AM

Fees, surcharges, etc. are taxes in disguise. Shifting more costs to the Federal government is a wonderful idea. Who pays the utltimate costs of the Federal government? Another great liberal thought of how to tax the guy behind the tree, not me.

blklabJun. 22, 1111:38 AM

How many times does the 6% increase have to be debunked. Even Senator Koch has admitted that this figure isn't quite right. DUH

mjwalker64Jun. 22, 11 1:52 PM

ARSPARTS - Albert Camus said this as well: "Every man needs slaves like he needs clean air. To rule is to breathe, is it not?" Still agree with him?

masterpoJun. 23, 11 7:33 PM

bernice3 - You must be a constitutional scholar! Please show us in the US Constitution where it says that the role of the federal government is to redistribute income. Thanks.


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters