Amendment 69 on Colorado s ballot this fall would create a single-payer state health care system, known as ColoradoCare, that would be paid for with a 10 percent premium tax on payrolls or other income. (Denver Post file)
Re: Amendment 69: ColoradoCare, April 3 point-counterpoint columns.
Anders Fremstad s column in favor of ColoradoCare health reform ( ColoradoCare makes sense economically ) was thorough and encouraging. However, it is not quite accurate to compare ColoradoCare to European systems, which are government-run or tightly controlled. My understanding from www.coloradocare.org is that it would be run more like a statewide non-profit cooperative, perhaps similar to some electric utilities. The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) permits states to innovate in this way so long as federal health standards are met.
In any case, it would go a long way toward quality health care for all and make health care a human right. It would have little to no impact on Medicare or VA recipients.
Barry Karlin, Lafayette
This letter was published in the April 10 edition.Anders Fremstad may be an economics professor, but Denise Akroma Wentz ( Amendment 69 too costly for Colorado ) runs circles around his arguments by using hard facts instead of glib generalities and strategic omissions.
Fremstad blithely references other developed countries and hinges his arguments on a typical Coloradan working full time at the median wage of $18 an hour. There is no such person, and any serious, legitimate argument would avoid that entire framework.
Wentz, by comparison, fleshes out multiple dimensions of ColoradoCare, all of which are hostile to income-earning Coloradans and particularly onerous to retirees. For example, a new 10 percent tax would be levied on business income, rental income and farm/ranch income. It would also apply to Social Security, taxable IRA distributions and pensions, effectively raiding funds accumulated through life-long prudence to provide for one s elder years. This is theft by fiat.
Workers beware. Elders, be doubly aware.
Bud Markos, Grand Junction
This letter was published in the April 10 edition.Our nation s disparate, market-based system has not delivered the low-cost, high-quality health care it always seems to promise. The most satisfactory parts of the health care system are those that have been government-run. About half of all health care is provided for and paid for by the federal government (military health care, Department of Veterans Affairs, Medicare). It would seem that the case for government-run health care is not one that is hard to make given the success stories we do have. And yet, the fear-mongering doesn t stop because there is a lot of money at stake here for a lot of business entities that have gotten rich because of the shoddy health care system we have.
It is time we put the lives of people above the profits of companies. ColoradoCare is the best way to deliver health care for all in Colorado.
Radhika Nath, Denver
This letter was published in the April 10 edition.My wife and I are both retired. We have Medicare Advantage plans through Kaiser. We have the Core plan, so we pay no premium. Our Medicare medical costs are deducted from our Social Security checks. If Amendment 69 passes, we will have to move to another state. This is not something we would like, but we have no other option. The cost of ColoradoCare would be too much to handle.
David Sullivan, Highlands Ranch
This letter was published in the April 10 edition.
Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
