Orrin Hatch Et Al Attempt To Kill PPACA Mandate

Packaged as a means to assist job creators in the private sector, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) introduced SB 399 to the US Senate. The bill was introduced on Thursday Feb. 28, 2013 is currently in the hands of the Senate Finance Committee.

The bill's text is not yet available to the public, still in the Government Publication Office's (GPO) backlog.

SB 399's title reads: "A bill to protect American job creation by striking the Federal mandate on employers to offer health insurance".

Based upon its title, business owners may be optimistic that the bill is meant to strike the PPACA("Obamacare") mandates that any company with 50 or more ful-time employees provide health insurance or some health care plan.

This bill, introduced in the Senate, faces heavy opposition, given the Senate's majority contains the staunchest proponents of a government controlled and directed health care system in the US. Most of them heartily endorsed and supported the PPACA.

If it should happen to pass both the House and Senate, it stands a high chance or presidential veto, as the PPACA is one of Obama's keystone parts of his administration's legacy.

The health care tax bill titled "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act", commonly called "Obamacare" contains measures that force employers to provide health care programs for their full-time employees should they have more than 50 who average over 30 hours per week. For many small businesses, this mandate would essentially bankrupt the company. Many companies, to include restaurant conglomerates, began changing their internal hiring and scheduling policies to limit employees to less than 30 hours to avoid the mandate. Other companies have been forced to reduce productivity and reduce manning to under 50 total employees.

Health Care benefits are an important portion of contract and salary negotiations in the jobs market. Making such mandatory would eliminate any competitive edge one firm may have over another in wooing quality employees, making the job market more controlled by labor. This would not be fair market equity any longer, swaying the power towards labor unions and associations, ultimately.

Striking the mandate would increase competition, increase possible benefits, and keep the government from infringing upon private businesses', particularly small businesses', ability to afford to compete for their market share and promote prosperity.