Tim Svoboda
Campaign Manager
Glenn Grothman for Congress

Yesterday, Democrat Dan Kohl released a new television ad, making several false statements, distorting Congressman Glenn Grothman’s record on health care.

Grothman campaign manager, Tim Svoboda, released the following statement in response:

“Dan Kohl is misleading voters in this new, false attack ad. Congressman Glenn Grothman strongly supports providing health care for those with pre-existing conditions. Despite the false claims by Kohl, Grothman’s record clearly shows he believes in fixing ObamaCare, lowering premiums and providing real solutions to rising health care costs. Dan Kohl actually supported the failed Healthy Wisconsin plan which would have imposed a $15 billion price tag, balanced on the backs of Wisconsin workers and employers. Kohl should remove this false ad.”


Dan Kohl Claim #1: Grothman “voted to raise premiums”.

Nowhere in the AHCA does it say that premiums will be raised on anyone. It does, however, mention stabilizing, reducing and lowering premiums.

Dan Kohl Claim #2: Grothman “voted to gut protections for pre-existing conditions”.

The AHCA did not affect coverage for pre-existing conditions and maintained that no one can be turned down for coverage or charged more.  “Coverage of pre-existing medical conditions: Under Obamacare no one is turned down or charged more for health insurance based on their personal medical history or pre-existing medical conditions. Under the American Health Care Act this does not change.” (EHealth)

Additional resources: (Dispelling the myths: The real facts about the AHCA, 05/6/17)

Dan Kohl Claim #3: Grothman voted to create an “Age Tax”.

The “Age Tax” is a term championed by AARP, which admits it is not a tax at all, it is simply a provision that removes a subsidy for older Americans that their own children and grandchildren are mandated to pay. “In reality, the proposed change would simply undo a misguided provision of Obamacare that forced insurers to artificially lower premiums for older adults and increase them for younger adults. The more accurate characterization is that the Obamacare rating provision “taxes” younger adults by making their premiums more expensive than they need to be, and “subsidizes” older adults by making their premiums cheaper than they should be. Thus, undoing that provision would simply remove a tax on young people and end an artificial (hidden) subsidy to older individuals.” (The Daily Signal, 2/24/17)

The so-called “age tax” provision in the AHCA only applies to people between the ages of 50-64 on the individual market. Five percent of Wisconsin’s total population is on the individual market. “So this doesn’t apply to seniors on Medicare, or people between 50 and 64 years old who have employer-sponsored coverage.” (Politifact, 5/11/17).

Dan Kohl claim #4: Grothman voted against funding for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

Congressman Grothman actually voted to extend CHIP for 6 more years.  Congressman Grothman voted just this year to extend CHIP for six more years.


In 2008, Kohl supported Healthy Wisconsin, a $15 billion health care plan paid for by a middle-class tax increase that was referred to as “the biggest tax increase in state history.”

Kohl said he believed Healthy Wisconsin should be the starting point when the Wisconsin legislature addressed health care. “I anticipate the legislature having a vigorous debate about the right mechanism to achieve full coverage, and believe that Healthy Wisconsin should be the starting point for that debate and for the action that the next legislature takes.” (Staff, “Dan Kohl: State Assembly,” Shepherd Express, 8/13/08)

Healthy Wisconsin would have been a state-run program that would have been funded by a new payroll tax on workers and their employers. “The major divides in Wisconsin were over how to pay for the program and what role the government should play. The measure, known as Healthy Wisconsin, passed in the Senate but eventually stalled over funding. The Healthy Wisconsin plan would have provided coverage for all residents of the state not already covered by another government plan, like Medicare. Those using the plan would participate in a health care pool, where they would choose from a number of plans. A government board would have served as the referee, choosing plans and establishing guidelines for coverage. The plan would have been financed by a payroll tax on workers and their employers, replacing premiums and other payments for private health insurance.” (Staff, “Wisconsin no stranger to health care debate,”, 6/11/09)

“Healthy Wisconsin had an estimated $15 billion price tag, which would have been paid by employers and workers.” (Steven Walters and Patrick Marley, Democrats will try to revive health plan. (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 11/12/08)

A June 2009 Green Bay Press-Gazette editorial said the Healthy Wisconsin plan would have been funded by the biggest tax increase in state history. “It sounded very much like the Healthy Wisconsin plan that was shot down during the 2007-2009 state budget talks, mainly because it would have been funded by the biggest tax increase in state history.”  (Green Bay Press-Gazette, 6/12/09)

Print Friendly, PDF & Email