The title of a recently released Yahoo! article is "Health care plan hits rich with big tax increase". There are two ways to read this. First, we could read this "Health plan hits rich with big tax increase", emphasizing quot;big tax increase", which is how Republicans are reading it/want us to read it or we could read this "Health plan hits rich with big tax increase", which is how Obama and his allies want us to think/what they want us to read (i.e. that ONLY the rich will see taxes increase because THEY CAN PAY THOSE HIGHER TAXES).

Now, with this in mind, again, we have to look at what people are saying and decide if what they are saying is reasonable/logical/coherent. To start off, according to Michigan Republican Rep. Dave Camp, the ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, "TWENTY YEARS FROM NOW, we're going to see more and more businesses ENSNARED INTO PAYING HIGHER TAXES". Here's the old GOP argument of "higher taxes", but it won't happen until at least "Twenty years from now" and people with chronic diseases may not have that long. So Camp's argument is not reasonable.

According to Clint Stretch, a tax expert at Deloitte Tax, "These are VERY BIG NUMBERS and VERY HIGH EFFECTIVE TAX RATES". Perhaps this is just a factual statement with no emotional undertone.

According to William Gale, a former member of George H.W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers and is now a co-director of the Tax Policy Center, "If health care is a benefit that is worth having, (then) it's worth paying for". Obviously. "This gives the impression that it's only worth having IF SOMEONE ELSE PAYS FOR IT" in the form of higher taxes, another overused GOP argument.

Camp had the final word: "THEY'RE GOING DOWN THE SAME ROAD by not indexing this tax". OK, has the GOP not been "going down the same road" by claiming that DEMOCRATS WILL RAISE TAXES?