Colorado Considers Universal Health-Care Coverage

The state would abandon Obamacare in favor of a taxpayer-financed public health system.

May 02, 2016

DENVER – The New York Times reported last week that Colorado is “flirting with a radical transformation: whether to abandon President Obama’s health-care policy and instead create a new, taxpayer-financed public health system that guarantees coverage for everyone.”

According to ColoradoCare.org, the plan will go before state voters in November as Amendment #69. The group summarizes the state-level plan as a resident-owned, non-governmental health-care financing system designed to ensure comprehensive, quality, accessible, lifetime health care for every Colorado resident. The benefit package would enhance the comprehensive health care services required by Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act, and premiums would be collected from Coloradans based on income.

“This efficient, universal system would operate in the interests of Coloradans. By eliminating layers of bureaucracy and reducing administrative and other nonmedical costs, ColoradoCare would cover all residents and cost less than the current system,” notes ColoradoCare.org.

The New York Times suggests that passage of Amendment #69 is uncertain, noting that Colorado “has a mixed record when it comes to ballot measures, though it has passed some notable ones over the years, including marijuana legalization and the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, an anti-tax, anti-spending constitutional amendment.”

However, in the current “season of political discontent” leading up the November elections, the Times writes that the notion of “dismantling the health insurance system has tapped an aquifer of frustration from voters.” Even with the enactment of the Affordable Care Act, some say they are still paying high premiums and thousands in deductibles.

“I think insurance is one of the biggest jokes and crooks,” Brandon Barta of Denver told the news source, adding that his father, who worked at a gas station, died at the age of 64 and did not receive aggressive enough treatment for prostate cancer. “He was overlooked,” Barta said.

While the notion of a universal health plan is intriguing, Barta does question how much it would cost taxpayers. The Times says that if the ballot measure if approved by voters in November, the system would begin in 2019, “be financed by payroll taxes of 3.3% for workers and 6.7% for employers. It would impose a 10% tax on investment income, people who are self-employed and some small-business income.”

According to the Colorado Health Institute, the plan would be “the most far-reaching health care reform in any state” since the Affordable Care Act.

“It’s replacing a system that I think has become really dysfunctional,” Irene Aguilar, a Colorado state senator and physician who is leading the effort, told the New York Times, adding, “The game has been rigged by the for-profit corporations to ensure they win.”

Opponents of Amendment #69 say the plan could wreak havoc on the state’s economy and drive doctors and businesses out of the state. Also, the plan’s costs “could spiral out of control,” the Times notes.

“It would be a disastrous economic impact on the state,” Walker Stapleton, Colorado’s treasurer and a co-chairman of the opposition campaign, told the news source. “If you think legalized pot brought a lot of people to Colorado, you should try free health care.”

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement