The report says that a study by the National Federation of Independent Business, “the nation’s largest small business association, found that an employer mandate alone could lead to the elimination of 1.6 million jobs between 2009 and 2014, with 66 percent of those coming from small businesses.”
Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said: “The (NFIB) report analyzes the effect of an individual mandate. Obama care includes an individual mandate. We make that clear in the report.”
So Mr Steel asserts that “employer mandate” means “individual mandate.” He is lying.
The whole article is worth reading (and discussed at length after the jump). Lightman proves at great length that the “19-page Jan. 6 report, “ObamaCare: A Budget-Busting, Job-Killing Health Care Law.”” is fundamentally fraudulent.
But what of the rest of the US press corps. If it is true, as I believe, that McClatchy has this reporting business under control, what are the rest of them to do ? I think they could usefully teach primary school — certainly they treat their readers and viewwers as children.
The subject of Steel’s blatant lie was this absurd assertion in the 19 page report
— The report says that a study by the National Federation of Independent Business, “the nation’s largest small business association, found that an employer mandate alone could lead to the elimination of 1.6 million jobs between 2009 and 2014, with 66 percent of those coming from small businesses.”
But that study was released on Jan. 28, 2009, well before the law was written. It studied a model, not the law that was enacted eventually, and it was based on a different set of assumptions.
“It’s old. We don’t use it anymore because it was based on a hypothetical mandate,” NFIB spokeswoman Stephanie Cathcart said. While her group still thinks that the law will hurt business job growth, it cites no firm number.
— The GOP report says: “Economic theory suggests the penalty should ultimately be passed through (as) lower wages (to an employee),” quoting a Congressional Research Service report.
But Republicans chop that sentence short; the CRS version goes on to say that the penalty for not offering coverage “would not be a burden on small business owners.”
Rather an important omission wouldn’t you say ?