Understanding the Constitution: the 14th Amendment: Part I
- November 15, 2021
The problem is that the actual insurance that health plans offer may be fairly lousy — perhaps just a little better than the typical managed care plan offered under Medicaid. That’s because of the way these insurance products are going to be regulated, and the way they will be priced under the federal scheme.
READ MOREGovernment has no business running health benefits exchanges. They compete with private ventures. Politico reports: “To some observers, the growing interest in private health exchanges indicates that employers would be less likely to send their employees to the public exchanges to take advantage of public subsidies.”
READ MOREObamaCare threatens the solvency of private health plans, which will significantly reduce consumer choice and increase costs. …[In] Colorado, where one large health plan has already announced plans to leave the state, Graham’s analysis demonstrates a “cascade” of insolvency, whereby only five of the ten largest plans in 2009 will be operating in 2017.
READ MORELast week Governor Hickenlooper’s office announced the members of the Colorado Health Benefits Exchange Board. Paul Howard and Stephen T. Parente write why such exchanges are built to fail. Because of a “litany of new minimum-insurance requirements and regulations … health insurance purchased through an exchange will likely end up more expensive than it is now.”
READ MOREIn the Denver Post: “Say a street thug breaks your nose, robs you, and then offers to “help” by driving you to the hospital. Would you accept? But some Colo. legislators are accepting – by supporting the Washington-controlled health insurance exchange in Senate Bill 11-200.”
READ MOREThe feds have broad authority over how state legislatures operate nominally “state-run” health insurance exchanges. The exchanges have “police” functions helping the IRS punish the uninsured. They also expand gov’t dependency & power.
READ MORE