Colorado Health Benefits Exchange: Will Federal Rules Dominate?
Wisonsin Sec. of Health Dennis Smith on feds: “It’s not that they don’t have answers because they’re withholding it from us, it’s that they don’t have answers because they don’t have answers.” Continue reading
Stopping Obamacare: 10 Reasons to Oppose the “Exchanges”
As listed by the Citizens Council for Health Freedom Continue reading
States Can Still Kill Obamacare. But not Colorado. Thanks Amy Stephens.
States don’t need to wait until Election Day to take aim at a point of vulnerability that remains in place despite the Courts latest caprice. They can refuse to implement the laws insurance exchanges. Continue reading
Contra Rep. Amy Stephens, States should reject ObamaCare insurance exchanges
While Colorado Rep. Amy Stephens continues to support the government controlled health insurance exchange she established with SB-200, Michael Cannon at Cato explains why this is a bad idea: Continue reading
Health benefits exchanges: Insurers most concerned with adverse selection
“Nearly half of 153 health plan executives whose companies are likely to participate in an exchange cite adverse selection as a top concern.” Continue reading
Colorado Health Benefits Exchange: Computer problems, will progress even if ObamaCare overturned?
The Urban Institute says that the biggest challenge for CO’s exchange that it’s “starting with a flawed foundation, a legacy computer system – CBMS Colorado Benefits Management System – that is inflexible and difficult to modify.” Continue reading
Obamacare’s state-run insurance exchanges: stopping them is key
Obamacare does not and cannot mandate that states create exchanges. Moreover, state-run exchanges do not preserve local control. They will do Washington’s bidding, or else they will be commandeered or swept aside. Continue reading
Feds scrounge for funds to create ObamaCare ‘Exchanges’
“[T]he federal government doesn’t have the money to create ObamaCare Exchanges, and the administration has no hope of getting that funding through the Republican-controlled House. So if states don’t create Exchanges, they might not exist.” Continue reading
Colorado SB 12-053: Why state insurance exchange should be repealed
The Citizens Council on Health Freedom recently sent out the following e-mail that summarizes key points about why repealing Colorado’s Health Benefits Exchange (SB 11-200) is a good idea: Continue reading
Feds won’t add any insurance coverage mandates in exchanges – for now
“Insurance providers will not have to offer any new health benefits beyond what the state of Colorado already mandates … in order to sell policies in health benefits exchanges, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced.” This won’t be a “race to the bottom,” contrary to critics. Continue reading
Authorities to decide what health plans in “exchanges” cover, not a freed market
The political process for controlling health plans is akin to having the FCC decide what features cell phone plans should cover. Surely there would be groups pushing to ban, say, plans that lack unlimited text messaging. This would increase the price of all plans, even for those who never text.
Employer mandate for “affordable coverage” creates confusing incentives for employers, employees
If [an employer] does offer health insurance, the worker with dependents will prefer that the coverage is unaffordable. That’s not a typo — if the coverage is unaffordable, then the employee will be able to buy health insurance for his family on the exchange. Continue reading
