THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRONIC, ELECTRICAL, SALARIED, MACHINE AND FURNITURE WORKERS

 

 

PRINT THIS PAGE SHARE THIS PAGE HELP

C.O.P.E. News

C.O.P.E HANDBILL OCTOBER 16, 2008

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2008
Selective Morality & Abortion
 
    While the economic crisis has become the most important issue for most people in this year’s election,abortion continues to be an important moral issue to a lot of people. But, is it the only moral issue? Whatever your opinion is about abortion, we all should agree that morality can not be legislated. We should also agree that a good way to reduce the number of abortions is to support policies and programs that help reduce poverty, improve education and public assistance for childcare, create better healthcare for poor working families and promote foster care and adoption. John McCain voted to cut $40 million in spending for social programs for the poor. Barack Obama voted against these cuts.While Obama supports the Supreme Court’s decision under Roe vs. Wade, McCain also supported it before he was against it. (www.ontheissues.org).
 
   Some politicians are very good at using abortion to over shadow other moral issues. They also use the abortion issue and the news media to create political division in order to capture single-issue voters. A lot of politicians seem to embrace only the moral issues that support their own agenda or career. We should be debating all the moral issues in this election year not just the few that are highly emotional and political. Barack Obama is talking a lot about other moral issues including healthcare, poverty and labor rights. Obama’s campaign addresses the following questions: Isn’t it a moral issue to cut welfare programs for the poor in order to reduce taxes for the rich? According to a study by the urban institute, over 137,000 people in America died in the years 2000 through 2006 because they lacked medical insurance (www.urban.org). 45.7 million American residents didn’t have healthcare insurance in 2007 (U.S. Census Bureau report dated Aug.26, 2008). Isn’t this a moral issue?
  
 If labor exploitation is described as a major cause of poverty, will conservatives and liberals define this as an important moral issue? Obviously, those who are profiting from cheap communist oppressed labor will define it in a very different way than say an American labor union leader. This is why most conservative politicians don’t use the word abortion and poverty in the same sentence even though poverty is one of the top three contributors to abortion according to women’s health (women.webmd.com). Isn’t it a sin to force American workers to compete with communism and other authoritarian systems that oppress democracy and Christianity? Isn’t it a sin in America to be anti-union? Doesn’t the Holy Bible tell us to “speak out for those who cannot speak, for the rights of the destitute, Speak out, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and the needy” (Proverbs 31: 8-9). Isn’t this what labor unions do?   When is the last time you heard an evangelist preacher talk on TV about Proverbs 22:16 where it says, “He that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, and he that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want.” What about Malachi 3:5 where it reads, “And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against those who exploit wage earner, saith the Lord of hosts”.   Why is John McCain one of the most anti-union Senators in Congress?
 
 If politicians want to use moral issues to get votes, then they should be willing to talk about all the moral issues and not use selective morality.
 
Sources: Blue Collar Jesus by  Darren Cushman Woodand John MacArthur Study Bible
 
Issued by Local 808 COPE
 

C.O.P.E HANDBILL OCTOBER 8, 2008

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2008

Economic Reality Check

 

     The rich are getting richer while the rest of us are working harder for less. The majority of Americans are less secure and less hopeful about their future. Good paying jobs are disappearing. Real wages and family incomes are falling. Retirement security is fading. Healthcare costs are out of control. 401K’s are taking a dive. Millions of people are losing their homes, and we’re looking at over $1 trillion of taxpayer money to bail out Wall-Street financial firms. Conservatives preach that liberals, who believe in shared prosperity, want to redistribute our national wealth, but the facts show that conservatives continue to push policies that have redistributed a larger proportion of our national wealth to the top 10% of the riches Americans. Let’s look at the facts:

   

    90% of our nation’s income gains since 1989 went to the highest-earning 10% of U.S. households. Over 90% of the value of shareholders’ equity in America is owned by the riches 10% of households. 47% is owned by the top 1% of households who also control 38% of the wealth but pay 24.8% of federal taxes. The bottom 80% of households own just 2% of corporate stocks. The top 1% of American families took 23% of all personal income up from 10% in 1979. The wealthiest 5% have over 60% of the wealth, but pay 38.4% of federal taxes. These households have an average wealth of $10.2 million, but pay only 3.5% of their wealth in taxes. The bottom 40% of taxpayers has an average net wealth of $1,100 and pay 163% of their net wealth in taxes. The least wealthy 60% of Americans have less than 5% of our national wealth, but pay more than 14% of federal taxes. Between 2001 and 2007, over 4 million more Americans have joined the ranks of the poor. The median household income has fallen $2,000 since 2000.

 

     Corporate executives get paid 275 times more than the average worker compared to 27 times in 1973. Productivity has jumped over 20% since 2000, yet most of that economic gain went to the very rich while typical workers’ wages have stagnated or declined. Corporations continue to rake in over $150 billion a year in taxpayer subsidies, tax breaks and grants while using much of the money to move jobs out of the U.S.  In the years 1998 through 2005, 2/3 of U.S. corporations paid no taxes. Corporate profits now make up their largest share of the economy since the 1960s while wages and salaries make up their lowest share of the economy in nearly six decades.

 

      The United States has lost 7 million good paying jobs tied to unfair trade since the late 1970s.  50% of all manufacturing production of U.S.-based companies is located in foreign countries. We have traded $15 to $20 an hour jobs for $7 to $10 an hour jobs.  Medical bills now account for half of all bankruptcies. ¾ of these bankruptcies were from Americans who had medical insurance. There are now 45.7 million Americans without medical insurance up over 9 million from 10 years ago. Over 30 million Americans are underinsured. Medical care costs and premiums have increased by more than double the rate of inflation.

   

     Over the last 8 years, our nation has been living on borrowed foreign money ($365 billion from China alone) to support our over $400 billion annual deficit. Without adding the recent and proposed bailouts of over $1 trillion, our nation is over $9.5 trillion in debt. We have a $13 trillion economy while one out of five children lives in poverty.  37 million Americans live in poverty up 4 million since 2001. This is the results of “Supply-Side” Bush-McCain economics.

 

Sources:  Census data, Kaiser Family Foundation, Institute for Policy Studies, Public Citizen Trade Watch, USW-Hart Research, Financial News- Yahoo, Economic Policy Institute, Office for Social Justice (www.osjspm.org/101_taxes.htm)

 

 

                                                                                                        Issued by: Local 808 C.O.P.E. October 8, 2008

 

The Economy, Taxes and Jobs

Obama & McCain

 

    John McCain says he will not raise taxes and continues to say that Barack Obama will raise everyone’s taxes. The truth is that McCain would cut taxes mainly for those making $2.8 million or more a year while creating a new income tax on working Americans by taxing healthcare benefits. He would increase the dependent tax credit from $3,500 to $7,000 and cut corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%.  A tax policy center analysis said McCain’s proposals, excluding those addressing healthcare, would reduce tax revenues by $4.1 trillion over the next 10 years. McCain insists that this lost tax revenue would be offset by a growing economy and reductions in spending for entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid.  John McCain is also one of the strongest anti-union Senators in Congress which has had a major declining affect on wages and benefits.

    

   McCain now supports Bush’s economic and tax policies after voting against the tax cuts saying it would be mainly for the rich and add to the deficit.  His plan to improve the economy also includes development of alternative energy resources, but he has not committed to how much he would invest in this program.  He would balance the budget by dramatically cutting federal spending including Social Security and Medicare benefits and social programs for the poor. He voted yes to $40 billion in reduced federal spending for social programs for the poor. (Dec. 2005) and voted no on prioritizing national debt reduction before tax cuts. (Apr. 2000)  He said he is for spending caps and a balanced budget and is strongly against “pork” spending and earmarks. McCain missed the vote on the stimulus package even though he was in Washington DC at the time.  He voted no on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Jun. 2007)  John McCain has a strong anti-union voting record. He voted against protecting our overtime rights and repealing the striker replacement rules. He also voted against the “Employee Free Choice Act”.  He talked against tax subsidies for corporations, but then he voted against repealing tax subsidies for companies who use the money to move U.S. jobs offshore. (Mar. 2005) He would not vote to raise the minimum wage without tax-payer subsidies for business.  McCain also voted against a budget increase for SCHIP to cover more children with healthcare. He opposes any form of Universal Healthcare and he voted against retaliation measures to protect us from illegal trade practices and human rights violations. He also voted against an amendment to prohibit Mexican truckers from operating beyond a limited border zone because they are not held to the same safety standard as U.S. trucks (H.R. 2299 vote #252 7/26/01)

 

     Barack Obama’s economic plan would let tax cuts expire under current law for those making $250,000.00 or more a year and would raise taxes on capital gains and dividends above the current 15%.  Obama would also cut taxes for those making $150,000 or less a year and would eliminate federal income taxes for retirees making $50,000.00 or less a year. He would also give working Americans earning under $75,000.00 a $1,000.00 per year tax cut to help offset payroll taxes on Social Security and Medicare that most rich Americans don’t have to pay. McCain has publicly stated that increasing payroll taxes on Social Security is “not off the table”.  However, our research shows that he would primarily focus on cutting Social Security benefits. Obama would focus on maintaining Social Security benefits and raising the income cap, now $102,000 a year, for paying Social Security taxes. Obama would cut corporate taxes, but he would also stop tax subsidies to companies that use the money to export our jobs.                                                                                               

      Obama would increase the minimum wages to $9.50 an hour and index it to inflation. He wants another stimulus package this year and proposes to give every tax payer $500.00 ($1,000.00 per couple) to help pay for the high cost of energy. He would use $150 billion in stimulus money for developing clean and renewable energy. He would also put $10 billion into state and local infrastructure improvements. John McCain opposes this idea instead wants to suspend the federal gas tax (18.4 cents/gallon) for the rest of the year costing $10 billion in tax revenue needed to pay for highway construction jobs. Obama says he would expand the economy and jobs through increased spending on domestic programs, infrastructure projects and alternative renewable energy.  Many experts say this will drive down oil prices and create million of jobs. He said we could generate more than $150 billion a year in added revenue just by letting the tax cuts for the rich expire. He would also create a “wind-fall” tax on rich oil companies to help pay for alternative energy development which will help drive down oil prices. Exxon Mobile Oil Company received $17 billion last year in tax subsidies. Obama would stop these subsidies. Obama says that these increased tax revenues and taxes generated from a growing economy will help pay for his proposed investments in our economy, national healthcare, the War on terrorism and to balance our nation’s over $400 billion budget deficit. Obama wants the rich to pay more to support the War and to pay down our $9.5 trillion national debt.

 

    Obama says he believes in being responsible and accountable to tax payers’ and would maintain “Pay-Go” that requires no deficit spending. He supported the program that will provide government guaranteed loans to homeowners to refinance sub-prime mortgages in default. He also says he would “responsibly” draw down our troops from the Iraq war that has been a major ($10 to $12 billion per month) drain on our economy.             

 

    Obama voted against $40 billion in reduced federal spending that McCain supported that would have cut funds for social programs like Medicaid and Medicare. (Dec. 2005)  He voted to repeal tax breaks for companies that use the money to move U.S. jobs offshore (Mar. 2005).  However, he would also cut corporate income taxes for companies that do not export our jobs, but instead invest and create new jobs in America. Obama has a strong voting record on raising the minimum wage.  He said we should protect consumers by creating a credit card Bill of Rights. (Feb. 2008) and by regulating financial instruments to protect home mortgages. (Aug. 2007)   He stated he would fight the attacks on workers’ rights to organize and strike, (Feb. 2008) and will strengthen unions and workers’ rights. (May 2004) He supports the passing of the “Employee Free Choice Act”.  He was not in the Senate when NAFTA was passed, but he has said he would strictly enforce trade laws and renegotiate NAFTA to improve labor and environmental protections.  Obama voted against McCain’s efforts to eliminate our unemployment Insurance program.

 

 

 Sources:  New York Times, Nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, Candidates’ Web Sites,

www.ontheissues,org. www.2decide.com), Candidates’ Web Sites, www. 2decide.com

 

 

Issued by: Local 808 COPE               October 8, 2008

 

C.O.P.E HANDBILL SEPTEMBER 25, 2008

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2008

                     Issued by Local 808 COPE, Dave Jones Chairman    

 

        John McCain was part of creating our nation’s current financial problems.

 

    John McCain supported legislation to deregulate the banking and insurance industries. He helped sweep aside rules that were established over decades designed to protect consumers and lenders in the mortgage industry. He was always in favor of a less restricted financial marketplace. In 2002, He joined with other Republicans to push through landmark legislation called “The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act” sponsored by then Senator Phil Gramm who is now an economic adviser to John McCain’s campaign. This Act was to make our country’s financial institutions competitive by removing the Depression-era walls between banking, investment and insurance companies. This helped pave the way for companies like AIG and Lehman Brothers to become laden with bad loans and investments. In the 1990s, he backed an unsuccessful effort to create a moratorium on all new government regulation. These were John McCain’s words; “ I’m always for less regulation”. I would like to see a lot of government regulations eliminated”. We see the results of his deregulation drive. Now, he wants you to believe that he is the best person to fix our nation’s economy and financial mess. John McCain can’t hide from his record. The following information was part of an article written by Eliot Spitzer (then Governor of New York) and posted on washingtonpost.com on February 14, 2008.  During this time, John McCain fully supported George Bush’s economic and deregulation policies and actions that Eliot Spitzer and the Attorney generals were unable to stop that are noted in this article.


 

 

 

Predatory Lenders´ Partner in Crime
How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers
 
By Eliot Spitzer
Thursday,
February 14, 2008; A25
Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers´ ability to repay, making loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.
 
Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.
 
Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York´s, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.
 
What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.
 
Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.
 
Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, the OCC examined the books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but uncontroversial function. But a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool against consumers.
 
In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government´s actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.
 
But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation.
Throughout our battles with the OCC and the banks, the mantra of the banks and their defenders was that efforts to curb predatory lending would deny access to credit to the very consumers the states were trying to protect. But the curbs we sought on predatory and unfair lending would have in no way jeopardized access to the legitimate credit market for appropriately priced loans. Instead, they would have stopped the scourge of predatory lending practices that have resulted in countless thousands of consumers losing their homes and put our economy in a precarious position.
 
When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.
The writer is governor of New York.
 
 
 
808: tk                                                                        Issued by: Local 808 C.O.P.E.
opeiu #1                                                                                       Dave Jones, Chairman
aflcio                                                                                             September 25, 2008  

 

COPE HANDBILL SEPT 18, 2008

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2008
                      Healthcare

Obama and McCain
 
     Obama believes government must get more involved to help lower healthcare costs and to make sure all Americans have affordable, quality medical care. He would expand Medicaid, SCHIP and other public healthcare programs to insure coverage for the poor. He would also require all children to have health insurance and would require insurers to cover dependent children until age 25. He would also set up a “National Health Insurance Exchange” through which small businesses and individuals without access to other public programs or employer-based coverage could enroll in the new public plan or in an approved private plan. He would subsidize small business to cover their employees with medical insurance, and would make federal income-related subsidize available to low-income individuals to buy into the new public plan or other qualified private
insurance.
     Large employers would be required to provide medical benefits to employees or pay 6 percent of its payroll to support the public plan (EPI estimate). Small businesses would be exempt from this requirement. His plan would encourage competition between private and government plans and would allow importing of safe prescription drugs from Canada and other countries. All insurers would be prohibited from denying coverage because of pre-existing conditions. He would not place a limit on malpractice payoff, and he would support patient bill of rights and HMO reform allowing patients to appeal HMO decisions in court. He would pay for his healthcare plans by repealing $52 billion in tax cuts for those making over $250,000 a year and by improving efficiencies and prevention incentives. He agrees that the main problem is affordability and would also cut a typical family’s cost by $2,500 a year.
 
    McCain said we should harness market competition for comprehensive reform of healthcare. He would do this by encouraging more individual choices and responsibility. Like Obama, he said the main problem is affordability. He is completely opposed to any kind of mandated health insurance coverage or universal healthcare. However, he says he would expand government healthcare coverage for 11 million children and is for matching funds for senior citizens prescription drugs. McCain said he would place a limit on malpractice payoffs and supports expanding patient rights through a grievance process that would allow an appeal of HMO decisions in court. He also says he would address affordability through improved efficiency, prevention incentives, by allowing re-import drugs from Canada. However, he would also promote “High Deductible Healthcare Plans” and expand tax-free “Health Savings Accounts”.
 
Sources: www.ontheissues.org, Candidates web sites and www.2decide.com
                 Health@washpost.com & New York Times
 
  
What’s wrong with McCain’s Healthcare plan?
 
1.)     McCain’s healthcare plan will create a new tax on working families by making employer-provided medical benefits taxable as income for employees and retirees. An example: The current premium that Whirlpool says it pays for pre-Medicare retiree and spouse medical insurance is $12,028. If you were in a 15% tax bracket, your income tax on this amount would be $1,804.20. This does not include income taxes on any medical care expenses the company may pay out for you outside of premium cost. Whirlpool is self-insured. McCain would give you a $2,500.00 ($5,000 per family) refundable tax credit to help offset this new tax.  This tax credit would not likely pay for the new income tax and the increased premium for low deductable medical insurance (read #4). The premium for family medical insurance can cost over $10,000 a year.
     
2.)     McCain wants you to use the tax credit to buy a “High Deductable Healthcare Plan” (HDHP) that usually comes with a lower premium. He would also encourage you to set up a “Health Savings Account” (HSA) with the HDHP. This could dramatically increase your up-front cost for medical care because of the large deductible, which is usually $2,000 to $5,000, a year. Also, before you can open a HSA, you must pay the premium charge for a HDHP and put into the HSA the cost of the higher deductible. Most working people can’t afford the higher up-front cost. Even with the tax deductions a HSA can offer, when you add up your total bill for the new tax, the premium charge, the deductable and co-insurance, you could lose big time especially when prescription drug coverage must also be subject to the high deductable in order to meet HSA rules.
      
3.)     Employers would be encouraged to eliminate medical benefits for their employees and retirees, and there will be no guarantee that they will pass any of this savings onto their workers in higher wages or to retirees in higher pensions. $3.6 trillion in tax breaks over 10 years that would have gone to businesses for covering their employees and retirees with medical benefits will be redirected to pay for the tax credit to individuals who purchase private medical insurance. You will be on your own to negotiate with big insurance corporations for medical insurance in the new national “dog-eat-dog” market.
 
4.)     Insurance companies will be allowed to sell healthcare insurance across state lines and“weed out” the sick and the old that may be a higher risk. State regulation of insurance companies would end. Young and/or healthy people in one state will be able to buy private medical insurance much cheaper from another state. This will dramatically increase the premium cost for older or less healthy people. Even more Americans with major medical problems or pre-existing conditions will lose their insurance. Why? Under our current system, everyone pays the same group premium rate based on type of plan, age, number insured, etc. that is regulated by each state. Insurance companies can spread out the costs of medical care and premium charges over a large group of diversified customers. or Younger or healthier customers pay a higher premium than they would under a lower-risk plan, so older less healthy customers pay a lower premium. It’s all averaged out. Private group plans that average out costs under “community rating” will no longer be able to compete by spreading out the cost and risk. Young or healthy customers will leave the group plans.  Availability of medical insurance for older or less healthy Americans would decrease while their medical care costs would rise. 
 
5.)     McCain would support what is called a Guaranteed Access Plan (GAP) in each state which is a business association between the state and private insurance companies. Because GAP would cover only the uninsurable, the premium charge would be much higher and it would demand stricter control over medical care approval. Taxpayers would keep these premiums down by providing state grants that can be used to subsidize insurance companies to provide affordable medical insurance for the uninsurable. McCain has not estimated how much this would cost taxpayers or how he would pay for it. 
                                                              

COPE HANDBILL JULY 17, 2008

THURSDAY, JULY 31, 2008
C.O.P.E.
 
AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM IUE-CWA

 

                       
JOHN McCAIN WANTS
    TO TAX YOUR









HEALTH CARE




McCain Wants to Tax Your Health Care Benefits.
McCain´s plan will create a neV:J tax on working families by making employer-provided health benefits part of taxable income. (HealthOB.org, Forum, 10/31/07)
 
McCain Will Leave Workers to Fight Insurance Companies Alone. McCain´s plan undermines employer-based health care and pushes workers into the private market to fight big insurance companies on their own. Insurance companies will be able to weed out workers with real health care needs, charge excessive premiums and limit benefits. (HealthOB.org, Forum, 10/31/07; The Commonwealth Fund. 1/08; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/31/07)
 
Workers With Pre-existing Conditions Won´t Be Able to Get Health Care. McCain´s proposal would let insurance companies avoid state laws regulating health care quality, resulting in lower-quality coverage that avoids consumer protections and leaves workers with pre-existing conditions, such as cancer, unable to find coverage in the private market. (McCain campaign website, accessed 2/21/08)
 

 
                                                   Don´t let McCain UNDERMINE your Health Care

 







www.mccainrevealed.org
 
                           
                                               For more information, contact IUE-(WA at 937-294-1491 or visit www.mccainrevealed.org.



 

       
Me·CAIN´S HEALTH CARE PROPOSAL
Will Increase Costs and Reduce Benefits
 
John McCain´s health care proposal is similar to President Bush´s failed plan. Like Bush´s, McCain´s plan undermines existing employer-based health care and pushes workers into the private market to fight big insurance companies on their own. It will reduce benifits, increase costs and leave many with no health care at all

 

 
~ A New Tax on Working Families. McCain wants to shift the burden from employers to workers. He will make health care premiums part of taxable income, essentially creating a new tax for working families.
 
~ Increases Costs to Workers. The modest tax credit McCain wants to give people to cover his new tax would cover less than half the average health premium, leaving workers to pick up the difference. Also, by promoting high-deductible Health Savings Account (HSA) plans, which provide fewer benefits at higher costs, he will make the high costs of individual insurance even worse.
 
~ Leaves Workers at the Mercy of Big Insurance Companies. McCain´s efforts to "eliminate the bias" toward employer-based health care will encourage employers to stop offering health care, pushing work-
 
ers into an unregulated private insurance market to fend
 
Sources: The Commonwealth Fund, Envisioning the Future, 1/08; Los Angele; Time;. 11/20/07; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), Administration´s Proposed Tax Deduction for Health Insurance Seriously Flawed. 7/31/07; CBPP, GAO Study Confirm; Health Savings Accounts Primarily Benefit High-Income Individuals, 9/20/06; CBPP, A Brief Overview of the

 
for themselves. Big insurance companies will be free to weed out people with health care needs, charge excessive premiums and limit benefits.
 
~ Makes Health Care Harder to Get. Pushingwork­ers into the private health care market and promoting HSAs will encourage insurance companies to attract onl) the healthiest people, driving costs up overall. Insurance companies can decide to refuse to cover people with pre­existing conditions, such as cancer survivors. Retirees wil have a particularly hard time getting health care.
 
~ Lowers the ~ality of Available Health Care Plans Many states have laws regulating health care quality
 
by requiring basic services to be included in health care coverage. McCain´s proposal would circumvent these law: resulting in lower quality coverage without consumer protections.
 
Major Flaws with Health Savings Accounts, 4/5/06; The Commonwealth Fund, Paying Morefor Less, 6/05; McCain´s eampaign website, accessed 2/21/08; Health 08.org (Kaiser Family Foundation) Presidential Candid, Forum: John McCain, 10/31/07; Kaiser Family Foundation and HRET, Employer Health Benefits 2007 Annual Survey.

 
IUE~CWA
 
808: tk opeiu #1 aflcio

 
How you vote is a personal decision. Please consider the candidates policies when making a decision. For more information, contact IUE-CWA at 937-294-1491 or visit www.workingfamiliesvote200S.com .
 
Issued by: Local 808 C.O.P.E.
Dave Jones, Chairman July 17, 2008