Page 6
January 25, 2017
Your Carpet
Best Cleaning
Choice
O PINION
Martin
Cleaning
Service
Carpet & Upholstery
Cleaning
Residential &
Commercial Services
Minimum Service CHG.
$45.00
A small distance/travel
charge may be applied
CARPET CLEANING
2 Cleaning Areas or
more $30.00 Each Area
Pre-Spray Traffic Areas
(Includes: 1 small Hallway)
1 Cleaning Area (only)
$40.00
Includes Pre-Spray Traffic Area
(Hallway Extra)
Stairs (12-16 stairs - With
Other Services) : $25.00
Area/Oriental Rugs:
$25.00 Minimum
Area/Oriental Rugs (Wool) :
$40.00 Minimum
Heavily Soiled Area:
Additional $10.00 each area
(Requiring Extensive Pre-Spraying)
UPHOLSTERY
CLEANING
Sofa: $69.00
Loveseat: $49.00
Sectional: $109 - $139
Chair or Recliner:
$25 - $49
Throw Pillows (With
Other Services) : $5.00
ADDITIONAL
SERVICES
• Area & Oriental Rug
Cleaning
• Auto/Boat/RV Cleaning
• Deodorizing & Pet
Odor Treatment
• Spot & Stain
Removal Service
• Scotchguard Protection
• Minor Water Damage
Services
SEE CURRENT FLYER
FOR ADDITIONAL
PRICES & SERVICES
Call for Appointment
(503) 281-3949
Skewed Priorities for the American People
Abolishing the
ACA tilts in favor
of the wealthy
f rank c leMente and r on p ollack
Republican plans to repeal the Affordable
Care Act (Obamacare) threaten the health care
of 30 million Americans and would erode
some rare progress made recently to reverse
America’s growing economic inequality.
By taxing rich households and big corpora-
tions to subsidize health care for working fam-
ilies, the ACA does what good public policy
should: level the playing field to give every-
one a shot, not just those at the top. Abolishing
the ACA would only further tilt the field in fa-
vor of the wealthy and well-connected.
It turns out that taking away health insurance
from struggling families can be a windfall for
the well-to-do. The top 0.1 percent of house-
holds—those with income of at least $3.7 mil-
lion a year—would receive a tax cut of about
$197,000 in 2017, on average, if the ACA is
repealed, according to the Tax Policy Center.
Meanwhile, millions of Americans would
see the cost of their private health insurance
skyrocket because they would lose ACA sub-
sidies used to pay their premiums. The in-
creased costs would range from about $4,000
to $6,000 per family, depending on family
income. Taking away subsidies would make
health insurance unaffordable for most of
these families.
Denying struggling families quality, afford-
able health care while giving huge tax breaks
to the wealthy and profitable corporations
by
clearly contradicts Donald Trump’s claim of
looking out for the little guy.
In addition to shifting resources from the
working class to the upper class, repeal of the
ACA would also cost about $1 trillion in lost
revenues. This huge revenue loss would make
it impossible for Republicans to fund any sort
of meaningful “replacement” for the ACA (if
that’s in fact their desire). Most likely, mil-
lions would simply lose their health insurance.
It is important to look at who has gained
health coverage under the ACA, which is
funded mostly by $600 billion in taxes on
wealthy families and on thriving health-care
industries like insurance, prescription drugs
and medical devices.
Since 2010, approximately 20 million Amer-
icans have obtained coverage—in all ethnic
groups in every region of the country, including
nearly 3 million children. Among white adults
without a college degree (often viewed as the
incoming president’s “base”), more than 6 mil-
lion people have gained coverage.
The uninsured rate has fallen by more than
one-third nationally. Some of the states that
saw the biggest drops in their number of un-
insured helped elect Donald Trump, including
West Virginia, Kentucky, Michigan and Ohio.
Who would gain from abolishing the health-
care law and the taxes that fund it? Among the
big winners would be wealthy investors, who
often don’t have to work for a living but sim-
ply live off the proceeds of their fortunes. The
ACA places a small 3.8 percent tax on their
investment income from dividends, interest,
capital gains and rent. This only affects the
top 2 percent of households—couples making
more than $250,000 a year.
Much of that passive income is gener-
ally taxed at much lower rates than similar
amounts of income from wages and salaries—
at as little as half the rate. The ACA’s invest-
ment-income surtax goes a small way towards
closing that tax loophole, which is, of course,
just one of many enjoyed by the wealthy.
In order to strengthen Medicare, the ACA
also extended a 0.9 percent tax that funds the
insurance program for the elderly and dis-
abled—applying it to all the income of the
Top 2 percent. Previously, the tax phased out
for married couples on any income above
$250,000.
Thanks to this tax and other changes made
by the ACA, Medicare’s ability to fully serve
its 57 million participants was extended by
10 years and important improvements were
made to benefits. If this tax were taken away,
Medicare beneficiaries would face higher pre-
miums and deductibles.
Repeal of Obamacare presents a stark
tradeoff. Abolishing the ACA gives big tax
breaks to the most privileged members of
our society while increasing the economic
burdens on millions of working Americans—
while also endangering their health.
Polls show that voters in November over-
whelmingly believed the system is rigged to
benefit the rich and powerful. Repealing the
ACA will rig the system even more. Those
aren’t the skewed priorities the American peo-
ple voted for.
Frank Clemente is executive director of
Americans for Tax Fairness and Ron Pollack
is founding executive director of Families
USA, the national organization for health care
consumers.