Bartlett had a column in yesterday’s NYT in which he argued that: (a) the tax treatment of employer-provided health care is an historical anomaly, and makes no logical sense; and (b) imposing the burden of providing health care on employers is unfair and makes our products less competitive on a worldwide basis; so (c) we should tax employer-based health care contributions as income and use the proceeds to fund a more comprehensive health insurance system.
All of that makes perfect sense from an economic perspective, but has a doubtful future in the real world. The most successful welfare state programs are essentially hidden wealth redistributions to which the beneficiaries believe they have an entitlement. Social Security and Medicare have an constituency because the beneficiaries have paid into the system for years; the minimum wage works because the employer writes the check, not the government, so the money appears to have been earned; and the treatment of employer-based health insurance similarly works because there is no government check involved. However logical it might be, Bartlett’s plan runs afoul of this principle, so, barring an infusion of rationality in the political system, it will probably never happen.