The total yieldfrom this tax plus the recovery of taxes lost through the Internal Rev-enue Service subsidy of employment-based insurance could allowdiscontinuation of the payroll tax, corporate tax, and other taxes.

more than 400% above the federal poverty level,83% of employees are offered employment-basedinsurance.5In households with a family income levelbetween 100% and 250% of the federal povertylevel, only 38% are offered employment-basedinsurance.5

Employment-based insurance does not help solve thisproblem; it exacerbates it.

In some markets, a large insurancecompany is forced to pay more than twice the Medi-care fee in part to retain a popular health care system onits plan.

With few exceptions, employment-based insur-ance is administered by health insurance companies.

. Second in importance, hospitaland physician groups have formed larger organizationswith power to raise prices in many health care markets.

A reduction in health careexpenditures by only 10% would free $330 billion eachyear to meet other public and private needs

$10 000 per person per year andis at least 50% more than the cost in any other country.

Theoretically, the public option should be more affordable for consumers because the government could use its heft to negotiate lower rates with doctors and hospitals and to reduce costs

Medically necessary services would be covered and there would be no premiums, deductibles or co-pays

a "single-payer" system, which many other developed countries have.

shifting control to the federal government and essentially eliminating the private insurance industry.

many more struggle to pay their medical bills.

one in 10 Americans is uninsured,

not to guarantee health care to all

it's pretty pricey

Health care has emerged as a key fault line for Democrats