Economist Linda Gorman writes:
People who need to spend $100,000 to interpret 90 words of a ballot initiative, that the Blue Book interprets for free, shouldn’t have much credibility when it comes to controlling health care costs.
That’s how much the campaign against the health care choice amendment, Amendment 63, spent on fancy campaign consultants. The money came from union headquarters in Washington, D.C. …
Other donors include self-interested providers [who] like health insurance mandates because mandates will force you spend more on health care and they will get part of your money. …
Opponents argue that mandates are necessary to help people with pre-existing conditions get insurance. In fact, Colorado has been offering subsidized health insurance for people with pre-existing conditions for a decade, and will continue to be able to do so with Amendment 63 in the Colorado Constitution.
Read the whole article in either the:
- Denver Daily News: DC unions bankroll Colorado campaign against health care choice (Amendment 63)
- Denver Business Journal: D.C. unions fund the campaign against health care choice (Amendment 63)
