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
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
CO House Republicans block state-run exchange’s grant application
“Colorado House Republicans temporarily have blocked the CO Health Benefit Exchange board from applying for a $22 million grant … to set up the technology infrastructure needed to operate an online health insurance marketplace beginning in 2014” -Den Bus. Journal Continue reading
Politically-controlled health benefits exchanges crowd out private exchanges
Government 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.”
Colo. SB 11-200: Don’t get mugged by a politically controlled insurance exchange
In 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.”
Colorado SB 11-200, State Insurance Exchanges: The Case against Implementation
Establishing state-level government-run insurance exchanges “offers no protection against future decisions by the federal bureaucracy, collaborates with an unconstitutional framework, and risks undercutting court cases across the country.”
Colorado SB 11-200: Feds will control the insurance exchange
The 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.
Rep. Shawn Mitchell: No on SB 200: Resist federal control
Gov’t-run “exchanges are cogs in the machinery of the federal bill. SB 200 creates increased bureaucracy & the framework for subsidies — costs for most of us — & mandates, while conveniently concentrating the action in a perfect shooting gallery for the same special interests & connected players that drag the current system.” Shawn Mitchell in the Denver Post.
Colo. Senate passes SB 11-200, would create politically-controlled health insurance exchange
On April 27 the Colorado state Senate passed SB 11-200, which could establish a government-controlled health insurance exchange. Read up on why this is a bad idea.
State-run insurance exchange enables federal control of Coloradans’ insurance
“ObamaCare is unpopular, unwieldy, expensive, arguably unconstitutional, and a prime target for repeal. It requires the states to do much of the federal government’s dirty work. Right now, the federal government is paying states $1 million to plan health insurance exchanges designed limit the kinds of health insurance policies available to state residents.”
SB 11-200: Colo. Insurance Exchange weakens repeal efforts, feds will control it
A state-run insurance exchange in CO cannot defend itself from burdensome federal regulations. Collaboration w/ ObamaCare “confuses the commitment to repeal.” You “do not want …Obama campaigning on Obamacare’s faux flexibility and responsiveness — as would have been demonstrated by bipartisan state legislation to implement it.”
