inflation reduction act after a republican amendment in the vote-a-rama past with democrats like kristen sinema, voting in favor of it. this is making the legislative marathon even longer as republicans continue to try to make this process as painful as possible. democrats are painting the eventual expected passage of the bill as a major victory, hailing what is in it for the american people. vote after vote after vote we have done this with no sleep 11 hours straight. why? because we know this bill is finally going to do something about climate change. lift the ban on negotiating less expensive drugs under medicare. and then as the name of the bill says, bring inflation down by 305 billion dollars a deficit reduction. oil need 50 votes. we don t need 60 we don t need any republican votes to do something significant for working families in this country. unfortunately, for fairly well known reasons we have conservative democrats. we couldn t get the 50 votes that we need r
one on the insulin cap, no one on this minimum corporate tax provision. not only sinema voted for but other vulnerable democrats in the midterms as well. this wouldn t make major changes to the bill in the green scheme of things. they are still getting the deficit reduction numbers they wanted, they re getting the climate pieces, like getting the tax pieces and they re getting the drug pricing and health coverage costs of this. sinema wanted this change made, again, democrats need all 50 democrats in line to pass anything. so regardless of what senator manchin thinks about it, or other democrats, they need to make those two weeks to get her on board. what happened here, just real quickly, is that they took that provision out, which means that some large businesses, private equity, who have smaller investments who didn t want this part of the bill that is not going to be in there. they took the provision out. instead of adding state and local taxes as the pay for, democrats had another
he or she wants and they ll provide decreasing costs and choices for folks you make it so the system can be responsive to that individual. that s the way you drive down costs. why not means test the tax credits? why do it by age where you may essentially have it where you re incentivizing folks not to buy health insurance until they actually need it? it s a great question. in fact, i ve been working on this for so long i ve gone through the phase where i ve had it completely related to income and became convinced by the folks who do this on a day-to-day basis, day in and day out basis, that the most predictive element of an individual s life in terms of what health coverage will cost is not income and it makes sense, it s age. as your age increases your health care costs increase and the cost of the coverage increases. so they ve pegged it to age. there s an opportunity to put some means testing in there, but that s not the most that s not the correlation factor to what it actual
age is the thing that correlates best to what health coverage costs. age is also and this is a part of obamacare that didn t work which was to try to get as many young people on the system. they needed 40% of folks under 35 in the system to keep premiums down. it hasn t gotten to that. how do you do it? how does it do it here? because this system seems to essentially say to folks under 35, don t worry about it. if you don t want to get health care we re not going to make you do it and that only increases premiums for older folks, does it not? no. what we say to that 30, 35-year-old individual, you know that you need health coverage. what we ll do is provide a system that allows you an array of choices so that you can respond and choose the coverage plan that works best for you and your family and not be dictated to by the federal government and have to purchase something that you most likely do not need. we have two pieces of information we do not have yet and there is voting o
even if you accept everything they benefit from increasing minimum wage, democrats say benefit from, the cbo said a million people potentially not able to get a job because the labor force then shrinks. the minimum wage is not a life-style wage. it s a starting point. what happens you will get reduction in the jobs created at a minimum wage that is 40% more under this plan than it is today 500 by the way. now a million. it was average 500,000. more people benefit. martha: cbo figures they pour in the numbers they re given, right? they sort them out. they figure out what the impact is going to be. in some cases they poured in the numbers and things were more expensive they thought for example, like overall health care package. i look at it from, if you re a small businessman in this country or small businesswoman, right? you ve got this sort of double-whammy, right? you have the possibility of increased health coverage costs for your employees, if you have over 50 employees. then