California passes single payer health plan, without a way to pay for it


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Running out of other people’s money: The state senate of California today passed a single payer health plan, essentially proposing to take over the health industry in that state.

It is estimated that the proposal will cost California $400 billion per year, which is twice more than three times that state’s annual budget. A Massachusetts study claims the government health plan can be paid for by adding additional taxes, including 15% payroll tax, but I am exceedingly skeptical. When have any of these kinds of studies ever correctly predicted the true cost of a government program? In truth, never. The cost is always higher than predicted, and the revenues raked in by taxes always less.

The article at the second link about the study has this interesting tidbit about the typical California voter:

The first-ever question to Californians on the topic by the Public Policy Institute of California shows that the vast majority of state residents were in favor of a universal, government-run health care system — as long as it doesn’t raise their taxes. But the prospect of paying the government for health care through new taxes caused support for the proposal to fall from 65 percent to 42 percent.

Another poll, commissioned by the nurses’ union, found that 70 percent of Californians were in favor of a universal, single-payer health care system — a percentage that dropped to 58 percent after those surveyed heard arguments from the opposition about the cost.

In other words, Californians want this stuff given to them, for free. They are living in a fantasy world, which might explain the behavior of their government, dominated by pie-in-the-sky Democrats.

Despite this, I expect California to pass this bill, and then find they can’t pay for it. They will then demand that the U.S. government bail them out.

Share

33 comments

  • LocalFluff

    Maybe they don’t plan ahead because of the earthquake threat?
    I bet every politician in California has an updated plan ready for how to money grab the federal reconstruction funding after the big one. As soon as the ground begins to shake they will start pulling the right strings to enrich themselves. Nothing is more profitable for a politician than a big disaster.

  • Max

    Good for them, they deserve exactly what they pay for. When you receive something for free… It’s because it is worthless!

    It would have made more sense to keep an expensive healthcare system in tact so the doctors can get paid… And simply vote that everyone will receive free money so they all can be rich. Venezuela promised something similar and look how well that’s worked for them? Inflation is so high that everyone in Venezuela are billionaires now… Almost enough money to buy a bag of rice.

  • wayne

    Rahm Emanuel
    “Never Let A Good Crisis Go To Waste”
    https://youtu.be/Pb-YuhFWCr4
    (0:12)

  • wayne

    Victor Davis Hanson:
    “The Future of California You Don’t Want to Know”
    (2013)
    https://youtu.be/PlydO0TaZH4
    (3:50)

  • Cotour

    This sentence is a bit misleading:

    “It is estimated that the proposal will cost California $400 billion per year, which is twice that state’s annual budget. ”

    This sentence might have read : “Which is about twice the California state budget for healthcare.”

    To read the initial sentence tends to imply that the $400 billion is twice the entire states budget. The actual total budget of California is in fact $532 billion, with at this time the total budget for healthcare is $162 billion.

    These details being omitted, whether by mistake, a typo or purposefully need to be clarified for everyone’s sake in properly understanding the issues at hand.

  • Cotour: Can you cite a source for California’s total budget? I have read several articles that contradict your assertion, and instead said that the $400 billion was twice California’s entire budget. If this is wrong, I’d like a source to correct.

  • wayne

    This may help.

    http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/

    (tangentially, I was trying last week to compare the budget’s of Michigan & Connecticut, and it wasn’t easy.)

  • Wayne: Thank you. According to these published numbers, from Governor Brown’s office, California’s total annual budget is around $124 billion, which makes estimated cost of the healthcare single payer plan actually more than three times that annual budget, not two times as I said in my post.

  • Cotour

    $ 2.6 trillion California GDP (2016 Wiki).

    Actual income in 2011 appears to be: $268.2 billion plus Federal transfers of $75.8 billion and $100.3 billion in additional local transfers. Total all in income 2011 that California will spend appears to be $444.3 billion as per wiki. What is spending really in 2016?

    This guy “guesstimates” total California spending for 2016 was / is $514.2 billion with total spending for healthcare of $143.6 billion. (?)

    http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/statelocal_spending_2016CAbn

    Confusing? Yes. I think it is designed to be a bit confusing.

    My question is: What is California (or any state) actually totally spending on all programs and obligations including state income and Federal income? Is California’s income $200 plus billion or $444 billion? They seem to be spending the $444 billion.

  • Cotour: The link you provided lists the total spent in California by state and local governments. The issue at hand is a state law that would impose on the state new budget requirements estimated at around $400 billion per year. The actual state budget in California, which would have to pay for this healthcare plan, is about $124 billion.

    Local spending by the cities and counties is irrelevant to this issue.

  • Cotour

    I remain readjusted, it does appear that the STATES budget alone is $124 billion.

    Taking that into consideration a healthcare cost of $400 billion looks like it won’t be a big deal.

    (Isn’t it irresponsible for legislators to pass a bill that would in fact be more than the state could reasonably afford? Their forcing a mandated bankruptcy type situation on the people of California is not a surrendering of their fiduciary responsibility? A cause for removal?)

  • wayne

    A State can not declare Bankruptcy. There are no provisions in the Federal Bankruptcy law for States to go bust.
    -Individual Municipalities however, can go bankrupt.

    The key procedural phrase from the Article on all this pie-in-the-sky stuff:

    “Senate Bill 562, by Sens. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, and Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, passed 23-14 and will now advance to the Assembly, where it will likely be amended to include taxes. And that would mean the measure would require two-thirds votes in both chambers.”
    ….and then it would have to be signed by the Governor to become California law.

  • wodun

    Taking that into consideration a healthcare cost of $400 billion looks like it won’t be a big deal

    Why wouldn’t that be a big deal? They need to drastically increase taxes to raise another $376 billion a year. Is anyone claiming California is undertaxed right now?

    Just because cities and counties also have budgets doesn’t mean there is a pool of resources to pull from. Where will the cities get money for their services if their populace is squeezed to pay more for single customer healthcare?

    Is California going to cut other vital services like firefighters, police, transit, schools, ect?

  • Edward

    From the first article: “I don’t know what I’m voting on.

    Not to worry, Pelosi’s philosophy works out great: “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” There is no need to know in advance of the vote.

    From the first article: “Sen. Nancy Skinner, D-Oakland, argued that a single-payer plan ‘may be a necessity. We may be faced by circumstances where our health system as we know it is decimated by actions from D.C.’

    Wait, does this mean that the bill that Pelosi wanted to pass without our foreknowledge of its content didn’t work out so well? Who could have predicted that? Well, who cares? This is California. We are better, here. We are smarter, out here, than those people in Washington DC. After all, it isn’t like Pelosi comes from California, and no Californian would ever create — or advocate for — a law like Obamacare. We Californians can make this work even if Colorado and Vermont couldn’t.

    From the second article: “To pay for it, they say, the state needs to find $106 billion in annual tax revenue

    Try looking under that rock, over there.

    From the first article: “Most California families and businesses, the University of Massachusetts study said, would pay less for health care than they do now, even with the new taxes, because they would no longer pay premiums, deductibles or co-pays.

    Yay! Free health care for me, here in California. Gee, if I had known that Democrats could provide everything for free, I would have signed up as a Democrat decades ago! After all, it is government run, and the government is on my side, and what could possibly go wrong in any government run system?

    In fact, in Canada, they get their healthcare for free:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2jijuj1ysw#t=10m14s

    Well, maybe the true cost is an arm or a leg. Most of the rest of that video points out the terrible treatment Canadians receive, the higher taxes that they pay, and the higher prices that they pay in addition to all those higher taxes, plus a celebration of Canada Day. Notice, too, that Canada’s government-provided healthcare is so bad that even the government healthcare providers recommend the illegal private health clinics, and that even the Canadian government tolerates those illegal clinics due to the poor quality of the government-provided healthcare.

    And if California goes broke and needs the federal government to bail it out year after year, then that is still other people’s money paying for my free(!) healthcare. Hey, thanks for the future bailout, everyone else, I appreciate it in advance. I’m sure that my appreciation will be of comfort as you work harder and forego vacations on my behalf in order to pay for my free(!) healthcare, while you toil hard in order to pay for your own federally-mandated healthcare insurance. Ah, what a great country this is when the people of one state can get the rest of the country working hard for our own benefit. You all don’t mind, do you? I knew you wouldn’t. What a great country!

    Don’t think of me as greedy for wanting you to pay for something for me, after all, you have been paying for free stuff for other people for decades: housing, food, healthcare, Obamaphones, all kinds of free stuff. So why shouldn’t I get my turn at free stuff that you could have had if you weren’t paying for it for all those other people?

    Speaking of a great country, it wasn’t Trump that made America great again (at least it is now great for us Californians), it was the Democrat-run California legislature. Hah! California’s Democrats have trumped Trump at his own slogan.

    Well, now that my healthcare is free, without deductible, and without co-pay, I’m heading off to the doctor’s office for my first free(!) visit in order to check out this annoying hang nail, just to make sure it isn’t something worse in disguise, such as cancer or heart disease. AFK!

    [Am I the only one who needs to be alerted that this comment is sarcastic, except for the arm or leg part?]

  • NormD

    Couple of points.

    Some part of local gov spending is for healthcare, so it is appropriate to include that part in total gov spending.

    To raise taxes in CA you need a 2/3 super majority in both houses. Dems have tried to lower this to no avail. The “standalone” healthcare bill can easily pass since it does not contain taxes and thus only needs a majority, the “real” bill which will include taxes will not fare so well.

    Lastly the State assumes the Feds will give Medicaid funds directly to the state to include in this project but this is far from clear. Its not a trivial exercise to figure out what these funds will be since there will be no actual Medicaid enrollees.

  • Cotour

    Wodun: Sorry to confuse you, I forgot the standard SRCSM designation after my comment. Unless the individuals that live in California don’t mind making up the difference through taxation. I wonder what the personal tax rate would be in order to pay the bill? Anyone know? They can only take 100 % of anyone’s earnings. Thats not much to ask.

    Wayne, Edward, NormD, Zman, all interesting information on this thing that when is all boiled down is another exercise in purposeful, socialist, political insanity.

    Besides my thinking that the Mueller investigation in time will some how wind up sitting at the front door of the Clinton Foundation ending in the legal reconciling (read: Indictment) of Hillary and her and her operations many, many legal offences I see this crazy bovine waste material that is constantly being shoveled at the general public will soon reach a critical mass in their collective consciousness.

    And at that moment the Left will again suffer more and more losses until some sanity is restored in their leadership and the media that supports them. This however may take 10 to 20 years to play out. We are now seeing an organized movement of Conservatives reaching out to advertisers and exerting pressure on them. I see this growing as its effectiveness is demonstrated more and more.

  • ken anthony

    What happened to the wave of CA cities that declared bankruptcy? I haven’t heard much more.

  • wayne

    Cotour–
    Mueller isn’t investigating HRC or the Clinton Crime Foundation. Not his Charter or authority to do so.
    – New York State alone, is responsible for overseeing that the crime foundation is complying with NY law. (NY has tight State laws on foundations & charities, when they are actually enforced.)
    Better get your commie-mayor & your commie-governor, to work.

    Ken– municipalities go bankrupt under Chapter 9 Title 11.
    (Chapter 9 allows a Municipality to abrogate Union contracts & Pension payouts, among other things, depending on what the respective State Constitution says regarding “sovereign promise’s.” In Detroit for example, the process grinded to a halt when Pension’s and Contracts were on the table.

    -Interestingly, Congress has been trying to pass a bill making Puerto Rico a “State” for purposes of Bankruptcy. (derogatorily called “Super Chapter 9.”)

  • Edward

    Cotour wrote: “And at that moment the Left will again suffer more and more losses until some sanity is restored in their leadership and the media that supports them.

    This seems to be happening in the rest of the country, but California is just getting bluer and bluer.

    Cotour wrote: ““I wonder what the personal tax rate would be in order to pay the bill? Anyone know?

    Robert’s linked articles suggested a tax that would dramatically increase the taxes paid by workers: “A Senate committee analysis released last week, however, estimated that the state would have to raise $200 billion in revenue each year, which it said could be done through a 15 percent payroll tax.” Presumably, half from the worker and half from the employer.

    This would almost double the highest earners’ taxes, bringing their state-level tax to almost 20%. Payroll taxes aren’t the progressive income taxes that we usually talk about; examples of payroll taxes are the Social (In)Security tax and Medicare tax, both fixed in their percentages. Of course, these kinds of taxes hit the lowest-earning workers hardest, as they come directly from each family’s discretionary expenses. So much for that vacation, next year, and beer will have to become Kool-Aid (is there a beer flavored Kool-Aid mix?).

    What an interesting place that California will be when its income taxes will feel like the federal income taxes. The healthy workers will flee to states with lower taxes, and then return for their golden years for the free medical care.

    My father has a different take on old age. He says that he has left his golden years and is now in his medical years. (Thank you all in advance, too, for your future support of my father’s medical bills.)

  • Cotour

    I know what Mueller is investigating. One way or the other this Hillary Clinton legal situation where Comey has essentially created a separate set of laws specifically for Hillary Clinton and her operation must be reconciled.

    Whether Mueller gets their through some Russian communication avenue or Congress gets there during their questioning of Comey revealing his blatant duplicity and HIS collusion between himself (Comey), The Clinton operation and Loretta Lynch.

    It must be accomplished in some fashion. This dual legal situation can not stand, and both party’s and most of Americans know it.

    New York’s issue with the Clinton Foundation is a whole other conversation. And yes, both the Mayor and to a lesser degree the governor are undeclared communists operating under cover of the Democrat party label. My focus is specifically Comey and his actions and testimony’s in front of Congress about Hillary Clinton’s actions alone with those that surrounded her and Loretta Lynch and her surrendering her fiduciary responsibility under pressure from Bill Clinton. Essentially creating a second “elite” set of legal standards that no one else but Hillary is able to utilize.

    IT MUST HAPPEN.

  • wayne

    Cotour–
    Mueller is “investigating stuff,” but it’s not HRC.
    Two years from now, someone will be forced to plead guilty to a process-crime. (It’s Scooter Libby, all over again.)
    New York State does has some of the tightest regulations on charities in the Country. (top 3) For some reason however, they have been letting the Crime Foundation slide for almost a decade.
    HHHmmmm.
    Who is your Attorney General?
    –It’s the NY AG’s office that runs the “Charities Bureau.”

    https://ballotpedia.org/Nonprofit_regulation_in_New_York

    Never, ever, count-the-Clinton’s-out, for my money– NY/NYC, will eventually elect Chelsea to be Mayor of NYC, the Governorship, or to the US Senate.

    tangentially– I see that Carlos Danger is backing living with his Muslim Brotherhood Wife Huma. (and Hillary’s Girl-friend & BFF.)
    -How convenient! Spouses cannot be compelled to testify against each other.

  • Cotour

    The front door of the Foundation will be arrived at in some manner or form, this is a “DEAD ZONE” vision. From Muellers point of view this is about the Clinton / Comey / Lynch nexus and the special law created as a result of it. The formal corruption of the Foundation which emanates from NY and is under NYS law is an entire other matter and separate. Do not waste your time with this NYS thinking for the obvious reasons.

    How do we Know the country is going in the correct general direction? Because people like this think the way that they think. “The rest of the world is against Trump”.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/31/jerry-brown-donald-trump-paris-climate-change-deal-238993

    Now be confident and certain while all around you are nervous with worry.

  • Cotour

    Clarification: Mueller will arrive at the front door of the Foundation from the perspective of the Federal Government, NYS will play no roll in this action. It will unravel first through the Clinton / Comey / Lynch nexus and then move the Federal Gov. to the Foundations offences.

  • wayne

    C–
    The Mueller stuff, is not an open ended investigation, he’s tasked with criminally investigating Trump, not Hillary.
    She’s Free as Bird, forever.
    ((the Trump Administration acquiesced to change a counter-intelligence investigation, into a criminal investigation. Dumbest move ever. (except for making Priebus, Chief of Staff.))
    The Federal government has no jurisdiction over the Clinton Crime Foundation. The IRS has no problems with the Foundation, that only leaves NYS.

    “Our side,” doesn’t have the guts, or the smarts, to trap Comey during any Congressional testimony. It’s easy picking’s, but they WILL, blow it all, just wait, watch, and see.

  • Cotour

    We have our stated positions, time will tell the tale.

  • Cotour

    An interesting way this may develop:

    http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/336172-dems-want-hillary-clinton-to-leave-spotlight

    Hillary just will not resign herself to the fact that she is never going to be the “first woman president” and continues to push to either be once again the Democrat 2020 nominee and / or she has initiated a PAC in order to once again control the message and the cash in the next election.

    I say the mass of the Democrat party needs her to stop all of her activities so they can some how develop an actual viable message because right now they have nothing other than the fact that the DNC is now controlled by full blood Leftists. The Democrats themselves may be forced by Hillary’s own activities to take her out.

    The Democrats themselves may have to drive the legal stake into the heart of their political problem, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

  • LocalFluff

    Cotour,
    But who else would candidate for the Dems? Perez or Ellison? Clinton is a somewhat moderate socialist and has an age old following. She is also a great money raiser. I think she is the best shot that the Dems of today have.

    Corbyn of Labor is catching up with Theresa May in the UK ahead of next weeks election. 1% to 12% difference according to the very unreliable opinion polls this weekend. Corbyn is a classic Soviet communist, like Sanders. Those kind of “leaders” are extremely popular among the self-exterminating Western peoples. But I think the openly outspoken communists and islamists scare away many in the political center who would’ve voted for Clinton.

  • LocalFluff

    I think Hillary’s criticism of the DNC is done ahead of the Dems disastrous mid-term election next year, when the Republicans will get 60% majority in the Senate. She wants to distance herself from any responsibility for that.

  • Cotour

    Neither Perez or Ellison, they are plainly full blood Leftists and are the polarizing forces within the Democrat party. (That works for me, it is a disaster for the Democrat party as a whole related to the general public)

    The next Democrats being groomed for their place as a socialist presidential tool will be someone like: Cory Booker, Julian Castro, Joe Biden etc, they neither have a deep bench nor do they have a viable message. There is a vast gap between their junior players and their senior players.

    PS: Clinton is done, she is a political zombie, and if she does not have the sense to understand that fact because of her mega ego she is going to have to be spoken to or taken out in some manner. I say she will be taken out with legal problems related to her many, many questionable actions, because no one has the fortitude to speak to her in the manner that she needs to be spoken to. She is the ice queen and she will ice you.

    Would you like to be the one to give her “the talk”? There are lots of people who have surrounded the Clinton’s who regret their association, some more than others. If you know what I mean, pure political and personal poison.

  • pzatchok

    The left is dead.

    Semantic Satiation

    Scientists describe the term ‘semantic satiation’ as the process in which a word or phrase is repeated so often that it starts to lose its meaning. How can that be? Scientists have found that if you repeat a word over and over, your brain will start to become satiated thus confused about the true definition of the word. Picture it like this: When you say a word, say, ‘book’ for example, your brain will find the semantic information for a book and combine the two in order to make sense. But, if you were to say ‘book’ over and over in a quicker manner, your brain will be less able to retrieve and connect that semantic information. Scientists have used semantic satiation to help people with stutters and Tourette’s syndrome.

    This is the effect the left keeps running into and not realizing it. Its killing any effect their buzz words might have.
    Like Climate change or global warming. Now without in your face positive proof people are just not associating the two phrases with any disaster or emergency.
    Or the Russians did it. They cried about it so much that without proof its now lost all real meaning and in many cases is even becoming a comedy punch line.
    Racism during Obama’s tenure. Even blacks are finding it harder to believe someone is a racist just because someone claims it. They claimed it so often on anyone who disagreed with Obama that it lost all meaning.
    This is also becoming the same with police violence. Even the left is not believing that claim as much as it used to.

    Moral Dumbfounding

    Moral dumbfounding is described as having a strong insistence on moral judgement without being able to provide any reasons as to why you feel that way. Researchers have conducted experiments in which subjects were asked about certain ‘taboo’ subjects. The subjects overwhelmingly agreed that these activities were morally wrong, but when asked why they felt that way, they had an incredibly hard time giving a real explanation. Although scientists have yet to really find out why this particular response occurs in so many people, it is generally agreed that it has a lot to do with society and how certain things are so commonly seen in a negative light that we simply have a strong moral objection to them without any real idea as to why.

    This covers almost every left issue. They fervently believe in something but have no real proof or reason.
    Human induced global warming or climate change.
    The EPA is saving the worlds environment.
    Abortion.
    Hoplophobia, http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/ragingagainstselfdefense.htm
    Everything around the world thats bad is somehow the USA’s fault.

    This is very similar to a persons belief in their religion.
    They absolutely believe in the rules or tenants of their religion without ever thinking why their religion has those ideologies. I.E. the ten commandments or sharia law.

  • Cotour

    More evidence of the legal inside drip, drip, drip hit on Hillary Clinton.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/10/hillary-clinton-emails-state-department-clinton-foundation

    Its coming.

  • Cotour

    Ignore that last post its from 2016. But the legal drip is coming.

    This is interesting how Al Franken is transmitting to Hillary to give it up. (how dare he!)

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/franken-clinton-move-election-loss-211441232.html

    I think we can expect Al Franken, who appears to be doing some strategic commenting and appearances to add his name to the list of potential 2020 presidential candidates. What won’t Franken do to ensure that Hillary is disabled for 2020? Probably nothing.

  • Cotour

    Believe it or not, this is California:

    https://youtu.be/Kji-RKiIYxI

    Trump supporters ran the Democrat right of of the town hall.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *