So Colorado will vote on Single Payer System

[Left Seater]

or so it appears based on the number of signatures that have been collected.

The cost is estimated to be $26 Billion or more which is equal to the entire state budget. This program would cover everyone in the state minus those on Medicare or in VA programs, although people in those programs could elect to be covered under ColoradoCare.

To pay for this there would be a new 10% payroll tax on both employers and employees. Some supporters would like to see those individuals earning less than $17,500 per year to be exempt, which would further increase the tax on other earners. A 21 member panel that would initially be appointed and eventually elected would oversee the program. They would have the ability to change the payroll tax annually in order to keep the program in the black.

Of course this proposal has people lining up on both sides. Business and union leaders have been the most vocal in opposition. Supporters say that having universal health care will make businesses in Colorado more attractive to employees and therefore business will relocate to CO. Major unions including United have pointed out that this proposal makes their hub at Denver less attractive to most employees. For the United employees that are Unionized, there is a wage scale that is based on years of service. There are not cost of living adjustments based on the city or state in which they live. This proposal instantly means the employees in CO lose 10% of their income for almost no gain since they have a "Cadillac" health plan as it is.

It will be interesting to see how this goes. Vermont thought about going with a similar proposal but scrapped it because the costs didn't work.

My biggest concerns would be the fact that it doubles the state budget and that the 21 member panel would have the ability to annually change the payroll tax rate without opposition.

Thoughts?



http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_29013 ... ngle-payer
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/11 ... yer-style/

[mvscal]

Morons.

[Mikey]

Not much detail in either of those articles about how it would actually work.

10% seems like a lot and means that folks with a higher income would be paying a lot more into the system for presumably the same level of care.

Would the system eliminate all premiums, deductibles and co-pays? If so then 10% would be a bargain for a lot of people. Not only those costs, but the employer contribution to insurance would go away.

If there are still costs on top of the payroll tax (deductibles, co-pays, etc.) would lower income people be further subsidized? Would there be optional higher level coverage at a cost for those who can afford it?

How would drug coverage work? Would the board be able to negotiate prices with big pharma?

A lot of questions. I hope they pass and try implementing this so the rest of us can see if it works for crashes and burns. The election won't be until next year, though, and probably take a few years go set up so don't get too excited yet.

[Left Seater]

Found this discussing the benefits that the plan would offer:

Comprehensive benefits must include primary and specialty care; hospitalization; prescription drugs and medical equipment; mental health and substance use services, including behavioral health treatment; emergency and urgent care; preventive and wellness services; chronic disease management; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; pediatric care including oral, vision and hearing services; laboratory services; maternity and newborn care; and palliative and end-of-life care. Additional benefits can be provided.

This replaces the medical portion of Workers’ Compensation. There will be no deductibles. Designated primary and preventive care services have no co-payments. Any other co-payments or cost-sharing must have ColoradoCare’s prior approval and can be waived to insure access to proper care. ColoradoCare will assure statewide access to emergency and trauma services. Beneficiaries will choose their primary care professionals. Beneficiaries temporarily living or traveling in another state will receive coverage.

[smackaholic]

Vermont tried to go this route, but, simply couldn't make it work financially.

[Y2K]

simply couldn't make it work financially

Sign us up

/s/ California

[Left Seater]

Meanwhile these CO-OPs that were created as part of ObamaCare that were going to drive costs down and make ObamaCare work are failing. 11 states have seen their CO-OPs fail or begin the process of shutting down leaving the Taxpayers on the hook for $1.1 Billion. Not to mention the promised cost savings that will now never be realized.

Sounds like we would be on the hook if this CO plan failed.

[BSmack]

Vermont tried to go this route, but, simply couldn't make it work financially.

In part because the law still makes it illegal for states to bargain on drug prices.

[Rooster]

All of which means nothing without the doctors needed to actually make universal health care viable. Just like Obamacare, universal health care coverage doesn't work because it's predicated on a false assumption: People want to be coerced into behavior that they otherwise wouldn't engage in, namely buying something that they do not believe they need or go into a line of work that isn't financially viable.

[Left Seater]

All of which means nothing without the doctors needed to actually make universal health care viable. Just like Obamacare, universal health care coverage doesn't work because it's predicated on a false assumption: People want to be coerced into behavior that they otherwise wouldn't engage in, namely buying something that they do not believe they need or go into a line of work that isn't financially viable.

ColoradoCare is making the argument that no one is buying anything so no one can self eject and opt not to purchase. The employees and employers will just have their income separated from them.

Your second point is very valid though. I would imagine that we will see more and more Drs move to the concierge model. This is a practice where the patients pay $$$$ up front to become a patient (initiation fee) and then pay an annual fee to continue being a patient. This is a model that will only be available to the middle class and up. In the meantime why would a new Dr with $100K in student loans head to CO when their income is going to be capped?