Hey. It’s your friendly CO neighborhood former diarist here, remembering why I don’t do much because TECH! ARG! HALP!. Sorry, I had to vent. I uploaded photos to my Image Library from my phone, but they won’t show in there on my Chromebook, so you CAN’T SEE THEM.
LEMME DESCRIBE THE PHOTOS. Actually, back up.
This morning, ProgressNow Colorado held a press conference to officially oppose one of my favorite things Colorado has attempted to do, and that is ColoradoCare. Now, ProgressNow happens to be one of my OTHER favorite things Colorado is attempting to do—hey, a great thing, plus a TIMEFRAME for doing it? YES PLEEZ—so this… this hurts. Not in any sort of destructive or personal way, but still… it’s Decidedly Un-Fun. And it’s not a surprise given NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado’s formal opposition of two months ago.
So, we ColoradoCare-ers held our own presser on ProgressNow’s doorstep this morning prior to theirs, so we could stick around for that and engage in SHOUTING—mostly polite dialogue with the some of the Dem Lege folks who had convened to also reluctantly and painfully state their opposition.
Now, of course I and the other ColoradoCare-ers think they are wrong to do so. Let’s run down the arguments against as elucidated today:
* NARAL’s opposition stems from a lack of a specific clause in ColoradoCare, Amendment 69, to overturn Colorado’s Amendment 3, passed in 1984, which prohibits state funding of abortion services. Since ColoradoCare is a Political Subdivision of the State, that would apply. However, there’s not alot of abortion services available in current ACA Exchange plans, is there. No. It tends to be covered by employer plans or supplemental insurance, and since ColoradoCare does NOT BAN PRIVATE INSURANCE, there’s no reason to believe that supplemental insurance for wouldn’t remain available, and in all likelihood at a substantial savings given the overall reduction of the profit motive and overall out of pocket costs under ColoradoCare. But maybe I’m wrong.
* The Colorado Health Institute released a report with a dim view of ColoradoCare’s ability to cover its operating costs. Fair enough. This came out just last week, and I can’t pronounce myself any expert on this. However, our side disagrees with the projected cost savings, which account for the discrepancies in operations/savings estimates.
* There’s no proof that the elected 21 member board would operate in our best interest. They’d be inexperienced, or worse, corporate industry hacks who would sabotage ColoradoCare. Except that under Federal law, aka ACA, this isn’t allowed. If ColoradoCare provided worse care, worse coverage, at higher rates than the ACA, its operating waiver would be revoked. It’s rare that a built in safety net exists, and we have one, so let’s by all means risk a FALL IN THE NET.
But here’s the one that really bugs me, and that I feel compelled to shove back.
* We just can’t do universal coverage, single payer-like plans at the state level.
WHUT. Sorry, no. Trying out new versions of the health care and insurance system is the whole reason, THE WHOLE REASON, that we have the State Innovation Waiver in the Affordable Care Act. What we are trying to do here in Colorado is improve upon the gradual successes of Obamacare. That waiver was fought for by Bernie Sanders and others to allow states to be laboratories to brew up better care and coverage for less… and NOW we’re hearing, “JUST KIDDING! You can’t really. No state can do it. Turns out this has to be done nationally… uh, because all the other reasons. We have lost our faith in a state improving upon the ACA using the ACA to do so.”
Seriously, that’s the argument. STOP TRYING. Maybe California will get the vote of confidence that lil’ ol’ Colorado didn’t. I mean it’s not like we can lead the nation in anything, when you think about it. Point made, folks. Because ColoradoCare is not PERFECT, we should reject the Good.
And that is exactly what ColoradoCare opponents are arguing, whether they want to hear it or not.
Sucks to hear it from the left, don’t it.