Will ObamaCare produce cascade of insolvent Colorado insurers?
ObamaCare 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.
Is the Colorado Health Benefits exchange built to fail?
Last 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.”
Politically-controlled exchanges & ACOs are about authoritarian control, not competition & accountability
“ObamaCare will force health plans to provide a nonnegotiable package of benefits, but will hold premiums at a level that will make it impossible to meet the full demand for that care. Instead, costs will be controlled by squeezing provider incomes and delaying access to care.”
How health “reform” punishes ambition & increased earnings
More fallout from ObamaCare (HR 3590), reported by Daniel P. Kessler: Consider a wife in a family with $90,000 in income. If she were to earn an additional $3,700, her family would lose the insurance subsidy and be more than $10,000 poorer. In addition, she would also pay more in income and Social Security taxes. […]
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.
Obamacare’s Cruel and Inhumane Inflation-Indexed Vouchers
For some prominent pundits, tax-funded vouchers for “private” insurance are OK when a Democrat proposes it, but not OK when a Republican does.
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.”
Colo. SB11-200: Shawn Mitchell on opposing state-run insurance exchange
Government-run exchanges “are just the next layer [of political meddling in health care]: a government solution to government problems. But it’s worse than déjà vu. Exchanges are likely to exacerbate the problem of political distortion.”
