A bill making its way through the Colorado Legislature would establish a state health insurance exchange, reports the Denver Business Journal. John Graham of the Pacific Research Institute warns that this is a bad idea:
[A] fire hose of [federal] subsidies explains why it is far more likely that Obamacare will corrupt Utah[‘s exchange] than Utah will manage to redeem Obamacare.
The same applies to Colorado, or any state. Graham continues:
The rules are not made by those with the best intentions, but by those with the money. Secretary Sebelius has the money, and she will make the rules once the gusher flows. Every state that establishes an exchange will sap the political will of the rest to defeat Obamacare, and states should not be fooled.
President Obama and Secretary Sebelius want to eliminate private choice of health insurance in favor of a government monopoly.15 If advocates of repeal fail to succeed by January 2013, Secretary Sebelius will surely sweep away any “consumer-friendly” accommodations with a vengeance. …
States establishing Obamacare exchanges are making a one-way, lose-lose bet. If Obamacare persists, exchanges will become bloated administrative nightmares. If Obamacare is defeated, states will have wasted time and energy that should have been directed towards that effort. Obamacare is President Obama’s problem. Don’t make it your state’s problem.
Read the whole article: Should Your State Establish an Obamacare Health Insurance Exchange?
Representative Amy Stephens, quoted in the Denver Post, said that “Most people viewed exchanges as the most free-market part of Obamacare.” I suspect they are wrong.
Well, I know they are wrong. The most free-market part of ObamaCare (HR 3590), and only free-market part to my knowledge, is the removal of restrictions on how insurers can discount premiums through wellness programs.
