Health care “reform” and “accountable care” vs. doctors’ autonomy
Under ObamaCare, doctors “lose their ability to practice medicine as they envisioned. The government will be making so many decisions about how doctors will be paid, what they will be paid, and what type of practice they can establish and operate.”
White House: Buy Health Insurance or Be Poor
“[T]he government’s latest position that the [health control] law doesn’t really require people to buy health insurance at all. We have the option instead of earning less money. “
ObamaCare waivers & crony capitalism
“There are now 1,372 companies, labor unions and states that have applied for and been granted waivers from an early provision of [ObamaCare] … What’s really being waived here is the rule of law.”
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.”
Massachusetts: The Canary in the Coal Mine for ObamaCare
5 years ago, Massachusetts adopted its “universal health care” plan, which served as the template for President Obama’s subsequent national health care legislation. However, MA’s problems of rising health costs & worsening access foreshadow similar problems for the rest of America — as well as how to avoid them.
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.”
Summarizing the legal case against ObamaCare
The Cato Institute has published a new white paper (22 pages) by its chairman Robert Levy: The Case Against President Obama’s Health Care Reform: A Primer for Nonlawyers. It summarizes why mandator insurance is unconstitutional.
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.
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.”
Do private insurance exchanges already exist?
The Denver Post has quoted Colo. state rep Amy Stephens as saying that “Most people viewed exchanges as the most free-market part of Obamacare.” But viewing state-run exchanges as somehow free-market is also wrong because privately-run exchanges already exist.
Washington Post & CBS Corp. get ObamaCare money
Two mainstream news organizations are receiving hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars from Obamacare’s Early Retiree Reinsurance Program (ERRP)
