ColoradoCare, the proposed government-run health insurance program presently before the state’s voters, is an extremely dangerous and completely untested social experiment that we urge voters to reject without reservation.
Should Amendment 69 find itself embedded in the Colorado Constitution, and fail even half as dramatically as it could — and we cannot imagine how it could succeed — it would take navigating circles of hell in a wooden dingy to correct the damage.
We apologize to the proponents for such harsh criticism. They mean well, and we agree that the state of health care coverage is maddeningly frustrating and in many ways badly broken. And while we also agree that a public option at the national level would help force needed competition to bring down prices, trying such a plan locally would be a fool’s errand.
Among just a few of the top concerns: ColoradoCare would create a raft of big new taxes; it would install a 21-member governing body with broad powers to play by its own rules, without traditional recall, legislative or executive checks and balances; and it would make Colorado a Mecca for patients who are both the most expensive to cover and least able to pay into the system that would support them.
It has even divided progressives more inclined ideologically to support it, as it would fail to cover abortions.
In its first year of providing coverage, Amendment 69 would raise $25 billion — essentially doubling the amount of state spending — by charging significant new taxes. If you work for a company, 10 percent of your pay is subject to the new tax. Your employer would be responsible for 6.67 percent and you would pay 3.33 percent, unless your company picked up that tab. Translation: less earning power. Also, any money you make from interest on savings, or profits or on stocks, would also be charged a 10 percent tax. State income tax refunds? You’d give 10 percent to ColoradoCare.
Small business owners who incorporate to pump profits back into the company would see those profits taxed 10 percent. Capital gains from stocks and equipment sales? Same thing. Nonprofits are also affected.
Business owners who provide employee heath plans would face a choice of switching to ColoradoCare or keeping their plans and paying the new taxes as well.
Those who are retired and on Medicare, the federal health insurance coverage, would still pay the 10 percent tax on Social Security pensions and other retirement income above $24,000. Veterans face similar problems.
It’s hard to imagine a worse climate for economic development. And if the real goal of ColoradoCare’s proponents is to drive existing insurers from the state, they would likely make significant strides in doing so. The system would eliminate Connect for Health, the Affordable Care Act’s Colorado marketplace to shop for private plans.
Another worry, Amendment 69 would set up a huge new bureaucracy with its own system for electing board members and approving future tax increases — which will almost certainly be needed. A study by the independent Colorado Health Institute says the program’s revenue would fall short $8 billion by its 10th year.
That’s a point worth chewing on. Proponents rightly note that consumers already are spending a big percentage of their earnings on health care costs. They hope voters will find exchanging 10 percent of earnings an elegant solution to coverage. But given that costs are expected to quickly mushroom, what’s more likely is that taxes will rise to chase after them, or that quality of coverage will suffer.
And before the system ever covers a single penny of health care costs, ColoradoCare would start assessing reduced taxes at a rate of $2 billion a year until 2019 to fund start-up operations. The law would require the governing board to agree the system was ready for prime time before it ever went live. Should political, legal or practical problems prevent a launch, that money would be wasted.
Other potential concerns include Amendment 69’s takeover of administrative oversight of the state’s Medicaid program for children and other state and federal health care as well as medical care costs currently covered by the state’s highly effective worker’s compensation system.
We ask voters to cast a resounding “no” vote on Amendment 69.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar