commentaries

Senators Klobuchar and Franken should have thought about this before voting "Yes" to impose this tax as part of PPACA. They can't now turn around and try to vote "No" on the Medical Device tax now that they're seeing the thousands of jobs being cut by Medtronic and other device mfgs. in Minnesota. If they were that oblivious to the impact that PPACA would have on industries in our own state, then neither one of them deserves to be in the U.S. Senate. This is what happens when you shove legislation through at 2 in the morning, and...in the words of Nancy Pelosi.."we need to pass this to find out what's in it." Replace both Amy and Al with other DFL'ers, but this issue alone is enough to run them both out of town. The Star Tribune should not be giving either one of them political cover (nor those House Reps who voted for PPACE) now that the 'what's in it' is impacting our state, and thousands of people have lost their job. Both Amy and Al were the deciding vote for PPACE, so we should hold them both accountable for these job losses. They either believe in PPACA or they don't. Don't try to have it both ways as politicians so you can run campaign ads that says you were for reform, before you were against it. This is so "1990's" and we are beyond that. Man up or leave. Either defend what you voted for, or leave. Don't try to fool the public. The only reason you care today is because of the job losses, and the projection that another 5,000 people are going to lose their jobs...only because you cast the deciding vote that cast these workers into the unemployment line. Yes, you can talk all you want about the law of unintended consequences, which is why you don't pass such monumental legislation at 2 in the morning without public review and comment, and without a single Republican supporting the bill. Compromise is more than a word, and if you had compromised then, we wouldn't be looking at these long days for unemployed workers in the device mfg. field.

At first it was John Kline saying the device tax will stifle job creation. Now that the device tax repeal is stalled in the Senate they had to up the ante that it will now be costing lives. The only truth I understand is that the device tax will likely increase the costs for uninsured patients and insurance companies, but it's purpose is to assist in paying for healthcare (and saving lives) for the millions that can't afford it. Every year there are millions of Americans that don't get a raise, and assuming cost of living rates increasing at a nominal 2.3% they've essentially suffered the same drop in revenue the medical device industry is being asked to take. If Kline and the conservatives want to change the law, then they should do it the pre-Tea Party way - COMPROMISE. They hold a majority in the house, but need a minimum of 60 in the Senate and enough of the President's buy in to avoid veto. Go work with 20 Democrats in the Senate and the President's administration to construct a bill that'd have a fighting chance. By not following this tried and true approach, you've become a complete waste of time for our Republic.

What rubbish! "Tax us and people will die!" Talk about blackmail. How about "if you do not have insurance, you cannot afford our devices and then you will die." Shameful scare tactics from companies that have profited from tax-payer-supported research. Subsidies are apparently okay as long as investors make a profit.

wtfwaldo: "Man up or leave. Either defend what you voted for, or leave. Don't try to fool the public." --- Have you ever considered that legislators used to vote yes on bills knowing that they're not perfect. More often than not, doing nothing ends up creating worse problems than passing something that's not perfect. Healthcare coverage for over 32 million Americans versus a 2.3% device tax - you'd have to be pretty anti-American to vote against that. Not that it's passed, there's no reason why they can't ammend it as long as they can agree on an alternate revenue source. You'll never get a perfect law initially, but our ability to tweak them is what makes things better.

"Between 1980 and 2000, medical device technology slashed the death rate from heart disease by a stunning 50 percent and cut the death rate from stroke by 30 percent. As a result, life expectancy was extended by more than three years." I would be curious to see the research that proves the device industry has brought about the decline in death rates. The rates have declined, but a host of variables have been involved, including, chiefly, a reduction in smoking.

A device can only potentially save your life if you can afford it... There are many, many millions of Americans who cannot afford it and don't even have basic health insurance. And this scare tactic is such old news - why is this guy's company in Minnesota if he is so worried about taxes - why not move to Mississippi along with all of the other great technology and medical companies?

Quote from one of the posters: "a device can only potentilly save your life if you can afford it".....well, who do you think will be paying this added tax? The answer is YOU or your insurance company. Taxes will get passed on to the consumer. A well written rebuttal to a flawed argument in favor of the medical device tax by the Strib editorial board. As stated, the medical device tax was justified in part based on the false belief that Obamacare would increase the sales volume of medical devices. I work in the industry and all major med CEO's have stated that Obamacare would have no measurable impact on sales because these devices are generally used when needed whether they have coverage or not. I trust the analysis of these industry experts much more than i trust the analysis of the desk jockey that wrote the editorial. As far as job cost, the original editorial slammed the 40,000+ jobs loss estimate. Stryker has already stated that up to 1,000 jobs could be lost just in that company. Another company, Cook Medical, cancelled plans to build a plant in the US becuase of the uncertainty. Adding another tax on sales will only drive more assembly overseas. This tax will cost jobs and will slow innovation. The other issue however is fairness. The US corporate income tax is the highest in the world. Singling out a specific industry for additional taxes based on flawed logic is not just, while at the same time a heavily union business (GM) still owes the governement billions of dollars.

What rubbish! "Tax us and people will die!" Talk about blackmail. How about "if you do not have insurance, you cannot afford our devices and then you will die." Shameful scare tactics from companies that have profited from tax-payer-supported research...... The funds for the research that many medical device companies do comes from their profits, and not tax-payer-supported monies. This tax will and has already cut back on research since the funds are not there to support it. I read where Medtronics has laid off, where Boston Scientific, St. Jude, and the list goes on, this after the passage of obamacare and the increase of the taxes the manufacturers have to pay for the devices sold......

why is this guy's company in Minnesota if he is so worried about taxes - why not move to Mississippi along with all of the other great technology and medical companies?.... The taxes are Federal and not state, so even if they moved to Mississippi they would still be paying the taxes.

I have been thinking about this issue for a while, and I think it's crazy for these companies to expect the government to buy their increasing number of products and not want to help in the raising of funds to help with the purchasing. They keep inventing new products that extend lives, but it's not free. The money to buy them has to come from somewhere, and not everyone can afford them or currently have enough insurance to get them under insurance, so through Medicare and Medicaid, we all will end up paying for them somehow, that is, if we are going to continue to fund them for everyone. Last I heard, out government is already overspent, and no one wants their taxes increased to pay any new bills. So where is the money to be gotten? Who is going to pay? Someone has to, so if these companies were smart, they'd get on board with a reasonable way to pay as we go as we continually increase our services to all. If they don't like this tax, what are they proposing to pay for the ever increasing amount they want to collect for their newer and ever improved devices? Don't talk about job creation when what you are doing is of course, saving some lives, but you are also breaking the bank.