THE LIBERAL FORUM The Liberal Party is proud to present the first in a series of forums exploring current issues in politics and public policy: FEATURING Henry Stern President of the Citizens Union and former New York City Councilmember-at-Large, speaking on Liberalism Revisited Thursday, January 14th 6:30 PM at State Headquarters, 381 Park Avenue South in New York City R.S.V.P. Space Limited Liberal Agenda Index Page 1 Page 2 Home

Liberal Party is Margin of Difference in Congressional Race The final vote count in the race for the new 14th Congressional District shows that the Liberal Party nomination of New York City Councilmember Carolyn Maloney proved the decisive factor in her November 3rd upset victory. Seven-term incumbent Republican Bill Green garnered a combined 97,215 votes on the Republican and Independent Neighbors lines. Maloney's Democratic tally came to only 97,059 votes, 156 votes short of victory. However, Maloney was also the nominee of the Liberal Party, which has never backed Green in his 14 years of office. Liberals delivered 4,593 votes to Maloney, securing her election to the United States Congress. Green's previous district, the 15th CD, was redrawn during this past year's redistricting process. The enrollment figures for the new district were more heavily Democratic than the 15th CD, diluting Green's Republican base on the Upper East Side. The Liberal Party extends its hearty congratulations to Representative-Elect Maloney. Letters to the Publisher TO THE PUBLISHER: The Universal Health Plan sounds great, but how will our government pay for it? Jack Rosenberg As described in the March-April Liberal Agenda, the revenues for establishing a National Health Trust Fund would be derived from such measures as a modest payroll tax, a four percentagepoint increase in the corporate income tax, and a long term care premium for the elderly that would replace the current Part B premium. However, despite the seemingly "tax heavy" nature of the Universal Health Plan (UHP), its economic cost would be far less than current health costs. The current explosion in health costs puts an enormous strain on our economy. During the 1980's, there was a shifting of the health burden away from the government towards households and businesses; government's health expenses increased 55%, households experienced a 65% jump, and businesses had to cope with a 71% explosion in health bills. The UHP would end the cost shifting and provide the strict cost controls necessary to prevent more fiscal hemorraghing. Overall, the UHP would actually cost less than our current system. A 1991 analysis by U.S. General Accounting Office1 concluded that if single-payer measures were implemented in this country, "the savings in administrative costs alone would be more than enough to finance insurance coverage for the millions of Americans who are currently uninsured." The alternate proposals would severely worsen the current crisis. Providing universal health coverage to the millions of uninsured under HealthAmerica, a system of flexible, nonbinding cost controls, would simply add billions of dollars to our nation's exploding health bill. And imagine paying, under the Republican tax credit plan, for uninsured individuals to enter the American private insurance marketplace, given such attempts as quasipublic Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield's to raise its rates 204% between January 1990 and August 1991. 1 "Canadian Health Insurance: Lessons for the United States," GAO/HRD-91-90, JUNE 1991