Obama To Meet With Union Leaders To Discuss Cadillac Tax

President Barack Obama is planning to meet with union leaders in the next few days in order to address their opposition to a proposed tax on high-cost health care plans, multiple sources tell the Huffington Post.

The administration recently indicated that it supports including a tax on so-called Cadillac health care insurance plans as part of final health care negotiations between the House and the Senate. The proposal, while believed to be extremely important in getting health care costs under control, is deeply unpopular in the labor community. Many union members are enrolled under those plans -- having given up salary increases to get the additional health care benefits. Now, they stand to have those benefits taxed.

Hoping to get the excise tax dropped in negotiations, several unions launched a public campaign against the proposal. Included in the effort were implicit vows to not support (though also not oppose) the final bill if the tax is included.

In light of the discontent, the White House reached out to labor leaders, asking to set up a meeting to go over some of the policy and political concerns.

"The president is calling us in to discuss some of the policy differences regarding the excise tax," said a union official. "It should be happening in the next couple of days."

The meeting should be a joint gathering with all the labor leaders and not individual sessions. The list of attendees is not yet final. But leaders of several other major national branches are expected to be there, including AFL-CIO, SEIU, CWA and AFSCME.

It was stressed that the gathering would not be an attempt by the administration to strong-arm unions into dropping their objections, but rather an opportunity to hash out some of the disagreements that they have with the proposal.

The White House did not return a request for comment.

UPDATE: An additional labor source tells the Huffington Post that the meeting will take place on Monday.

FURTHER UPDATE: The White House confirms the meeting to the Huffington Post.

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[huff3750]

12:49 PM on 01/11/2010

I'm a union member and I cant believe that Obama is just itching to tax my healthcare benefits . I thought the Democratic party was for the working class? I'll be voting out every Dem this November.

[Dajo]

02:50 PM on 01/10/2010

Union Leaders who are to the Right of Obama can't expect to move Obama to the Left! American Union Leaders will never have the same clout with the government as their European counterparts until they fess up and publicly admit that Socialism is a far more equitable for Labor than Capitalism. There is little hope for that however if the Union Leaders are of the same ilk as that of outgoing UAW President Ron Gettlefinger. Gettlefinger goes off into retirement with his Double Pension and Cadillac Health care packages while leaving thousands of UAW Retirees with a reduced "WalMart" version... See more of health insurance and reduced Pensions. Pathetic... Gettlefinger is a scoundrel who duped the Majority of Rank-in-File UAW members to vote to cut the Retirees health care (without the retiree input I might add). IMO the problem with American Labor over the last 35 years is that it has moved away from its Socialist roots. While there are a few notable exceptions, the leadership of the American Unions are entrenched with Quiz, or Wannabee Capitalists. In the future if American Union Leaders are ever to have any sway or clout with Presidet Obama or ant REAL, Liberal and Progressive Democratic leaders, they must proudly re-discover and embrace their Socialist ROOTS...

[ConjureMan]

11:28 AM on 01/09/2010

Remember the movie, "The Body Snatchers". Who the hell got in the Obama body that war running for the Presidency last year. This guy really looks like him, but he sure doesn't sound or act like him anymore. It must be time for an exorcism, call the Preists, get the holy water, and duck, here comes the big green hurl.

[sufi66]

09:01 AM on 01/11/2010

He cynically calculated that the Left would have no place to go, so it would continue to vote for him, not the loony Republicans.

The Left will survive the betrayal, but I cannot forgive Obama for what he did to the the young and new voters who wanted to believe his rhetortic.

He has turned off a new generation of voters. Shame on him!

[Okieborn]

08:44 AM on 01/09/2010

No discussion Mr. President !!
"NO" TAX ON UNIONWORKERS HEALTHCARE INSURANCE !!
TAX THE millionairs and billonaires sir !!

[OLJW00]

02:45 PM on 01/09/2010

silly progressive applies here.

[vincealy]

10:12 AM on 01/10/2010

They got the TARP money must have their bonus money.

[QuietLightTraveler]

02:31 AM on 01/09/2010

This is just another of the many betrayals by Obama. All progressives should not support him when he runs for re-election. It's time to send a clear message that this kind of treachery ( not honoring his campaign promises) will no longer be tolerated by voters. This guy is the worst BS artist I ever saw.

[ChelseaC]

03:33 AM on 01/09/2010

QuietLightTraveler,
Agreed.
Fanned.

[E-MU]

12:12 PM on 01/09/2010

Well, I don't know if he's the biggest BSer to come along but he does shovel a lot of it.
I once posted on the TPM during the campaign that I wasn't sure who Obama really was.
I got hammered as a troll and scolded that nobody cared about my weird thoughts. I'm sure nobody cared or cares about my weird thoughts but it appears that many people care that millions of others are unsure about who was elected.

[USAFVET76]

05:16 PM on 01/08/2010

Look what happens AGAIN when the Dem Congress and members of the White House meet behind closed doors.

[sufi66]

03:12 PM on 01/08/2010

I thought the death of the public option was the ultimate Obama betrayal, but it might be the tax on health benefits which will ensnare the middle class, due to health care cost inflation which the public option might have prevented. It's really a 1-2 punch to the heart of the people who believed in Obama.

Shame on him and the Democrats who have failed to stand up to the special interests ON ANY LEVEL!

Where do I go to throw up over their deceit and lies? Hard to believe they became as bad as the Republicans we were so happy to banish from power.

[thockman]

09:41 PM on 01/08/2010

Your said it, sufi666!

[ChelseaC]

03:34 AM on 01/09/2010

co-signed.

[DEJM]

02:14 PM on 01/08/2010

Please Rich Trumka...stay strong...do not cave.

[Angelic11]

11:48 AM on 01/08/2010

union bosses will work under the table to scre.w us on the other end...they'll emerge from this meeting a-kissing-and-a-hugging...and a taxing

[USAFVET76]

05:15 PM on 01/08/2010

yes they will.
union bosses will get their's no matter what the sheep members get.

[Raccoon1]

12:28 PM on 01/09/2010

Yoooooohoooooo! It's me again with the same question I've asked you more than once here, and you've never responded:
Tell us how much money the UNION LEADERS are making. How much? When? Show us your source.
"Among the most-talked about compensation reports this year is the $1.6 billion option package for UnitedHealth Group CEO William McGuire at a time when more than 40 million Americans lack health insurance"
How about insurance company CEO compensation? How can you complain about union leaders' compensaton when Bill McGuire, CEO of United Health Group, has a compensation package of $1,600,000,000 (yes, $1.6 BILLION). Here's my source. Where's yours?
http://www.directorship.com/ceo-pay-a-window-into-corporate-governance/
Also, please don't suggest that compensation packages like this are on the up-and-up when many CEO's have hire-and-fire authority over the members of their compensation committees.

[Kirk Kinder]

11:24 AM on 01/08/2010

As Americans, we have become use to getting health benefits without paying tax on them. However, these benefits are a form of income. As mentioned in the comments, many workers deferred pay raises for better health benefits. This doesn't mean they should escape taxation. Take an example of two workers making the exact same salary doing an identical job. One person gets a health plan costing $11,000 per year whereas the other gets a plan costing $6,000. Why should these two individuals pay the same in taxes when the former person is receiving more compensation.

It was only during WWII that medical benefits became insulated from taxes. The government outlawed pay raises for employees. So employers looked to provide other benefits as a stealth pay raise. Medical insurance was one of the benefits. The government gave this move its blessing because it felt that it would eventually keep medical expenses off its balance sheet and onto employers.

I think all medical benefits should be taxed, not just cadillac plans. The government could then provide a credit for a certain amount to cover the cost of insurance. This will eventually lead to a more efficient market as consumers search for better options. We may find more personal policies that stay with the consumer even during job losses or early retirement.

Of course, I do see why so many readers are upset with Obama. It is hard to take when you find out the audacity of hope is really business as usual.

[Angelic11]

11:44 AM on 01/08/2010

oh hush yer non sense...you must Richie Rich, ey? we've not had raises in 11 years to keep our bennies....so it was a tax by any other name.

[carbolaw]

01:03 PM on 01/08/2010

Just out of curiosity would you also do away with the favorable tax benefits of pensions, deferred comp, mortgage interest, etc? The tax free status of health care expenditures is actually a public policy choice - it is meant to give an incentive to employees and employers to buy and to provide health insurance. In this way we do not get the problem of uninsured individuals crowding the ERs and not going to the doctor until they are in the catastrophic range. It would seem that making these benefits taxable now, when we are serious about making sure everyone becomes insured would be contradictory to this policy.

[Kirk Kinder]

09:58 AM on 01/09/2010

Carbolaw,

You are right that it is a policy decision because the government didn't want to be responsible for providing health care (and they had frozen wages when healthcare first became a tax free benefit). But, this has led to the problems we face now. Some employers provide coverage while others do not. When an employee leaves due to personal reasons or layoffs, they are without coverage. The choice is limited by the employers decision. Group coverage is expensive for those who have it, yet it is difficult to get for small businesses.

I would prefer to see a system where everyone has a personal policy that they pay for out of pocket and moves with the person from job to job. The government can provide a tax credit to cover most, if not all, of the costs for the premiums. I would also like to see the HSA feature so consumers become more efficient when purchasing healthcare. And, they can build up a reserve fund when younger and won't use the amounts.

[Coinyer101]

10:41 AM on 01/08/2010

'Bamboozled'..........,AND 'hoodwinked'.....,

[Helzapoppin]

09:37 AM on 01/08/2010

Here is Obama in late 2008 campaigning AGAINST everything he is now trying to shove down the throats of Americans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8wmN3wvhNM

[Chris]

08:04 AM on 01/08/2010

IF they exempt union plans as has been reported as a potential compromise, will the CBO rescore it as tax revenue will be decreased? Also could this exemption cause an equal protection violation?

[RnR]

07:09 AM on 01/08/2010

Howcome Matthews, Olberman nor Maddow covered this? 2 1/2 times I heard all about the underwear bomber but not 1 word about this. I have to admit that when Maddow started, for the 3rd time, I turned it off.

[eolufemi]

11:10 AM on 01/08/2010

There are other sources of information...

It's a classic case of the "people" disagreeing with the "experts".

The people believe their expensive plans have high actuarial value and thus are necessary, so this tax on insurance companies will be passed onto them directly.

The experts believe insurance companies are overpricing plans with low actuarial value and thus the people don't need them, and will look for lower price high value alternatives on the exchange.

Basically eliminating low value high price plans with the cap on out of pocket expenses and requirement that 85% of premiums go to health care provision.

Which leaves that group of high cost and high value consumers still having to eat the cost of the passed on cost of this tax. The dems are trying to blunt their costs with subsidies if they are within 400% of the poverty line. The cap will also help.

Either way, people are feeling pretty cynical right now, so they aren't trusting perspectives that contradict what their instincts are telling them even if the issue is nuanced and not necessarily a common sense issue.

[ChelseaC]

03:39 AM on 01/09/2010

They're sellouts now too--GE owned. Maybe they would like to report this but their hands are tied
Watch DemocracyNow.org
I gave up on the MSM.

[magnumbob1]

07:05 AM on 01/08/2010

Political suicide.
What exactly is the up side to this idea? After months of deliberation, taxing people who are already paying too much for health insurance is the best our fearless leaders can come up with?
'Way to go team!
There's a black cloud looming over the horizon for Democrats, and it's because of non stop BS like this.
'Depressing isn't it?

[PaxEterna]

09:15 AM on 01/08/2010

Yes ...and STUPID. These people are bereft of good ideas, let alone good policies for America.

[nekoxgirl]

07:15 PM on 01/08/2010

I can't decide what is worse, the party of no ideas (Republicans) or the party of bad ideas (Democrats).