Now Reading
A Liberal Skeptic on Amendment 69

A Liberal Skeptic on Amendment 69

No one wants universal healthcare more than I do.

I’ve spent years writing about our failing healthcare system and researching those that do a better job in other countries. When ColoradoCare first introduced Amendment 69, I was overjoyed. I donated money. I offered to volunteer.

Then I read the amendment.

This is a big amendment with potentially big consequences. In a nutshell, it would get rid of all insurance companies in the state. Healthcare would then be totally funded by tax money. The thing is, we all pay for healthcare one way or the other, anyway. With universal care, costs are paid upfront. Instead of paying for insurance, we pay taxes that cover us all.

Under our current system, we largely pay on the backend. In addition to paying insurance premiums, our tax dollars are also used to pay healthcare costs for people who can’t afford insurance or for healthcare that exceeds what insurance premiums cover.

A study out of Harvard University finds high medical bills are consistently the number one reason Americans file for bankruptcy. Interestingly, most of these people have insurance. Many other countries have demonstrated that we can provide upfront, taxpayer-funded, quality healthcare for everyone. Of the 36 countries that rank higher than the US in quality of healthcare, nearly all of them offer universal care or some type of hybrid system (like Obamacare).

The question is: Is Amendment 69 the plan that will do that for Coloradans?

A lot of big claims are being made by both sides. Proponents say it will save healthcare costs. Opponents say it could bankrupt the state. Proponents say it will give us better healthcare for less money. Opponents say it will limit consumer choice and lower quality as many doctors, nurses, and specialists leave to practice elsewhere. Bottom line: We don’t know exactly what it will do. If enacted, we may not know many answers for many years.

What we do know that it will cost an estimated $25 billion dollars a year. That’s more than the yearly budget for the entire state of Colorado. It would be funded by increased taxes on workers and employers. If costs go beyond $25 billion, taxes could only be increased by taxpayers. At the same time, the amendment requires the legislature to fund it. If voters don’t agree to pay more taxes (as they often do), where will the money come from? My guess: cuts to other social programs, like education.

Our entire healthcare system would be run by an as-yet-to-be-determined, 21-member healthcare board. Right now, we don’t know who will sit on that board or what type of decisions it will ultimately make. Will treatment options become limited if funds run low? Will doctors be forced to streamline care? What will the infrastructure needed to run such a massive plan look like? How will bills get paid? Who will collect them? These are all detailed, specific questions we will not know the answers to unless and until we take the leap.

My concern (and I think the concern of many other liberals having second thoughts about this amendment) is that it is an amendment — a Colorado constitutional amendment! That means that when we run into serious complications (and we will), our hands will be tied. We won’t have the flexibility needed to roll with the multitude of issues we will face. No other state has done this. Ever. There are a lot of unknowns.

I still don’t know how I’m going to vote on this issue. My fears have me leaning toward a “no” vote. The potential consequences are too big. We may bankrupt the state and be forced to cut other programs to fund it. That scares me. At the same time, we may change the entire system for the better and serve as a pioneer for other states to follow.

I just wish this plan was a law, an adjustable law, instead of an amendment that requires massive efforts to change.

What's Your Reaction?
Excited
0
Happy
0
In Love
0
Not Sure
0
Silly
0
Scroll To Top