Recently, a ballot measure was introduced for November that outlines an insurance system that focuses on the utilization of a single payer strategy. While the experts involved in the proposal state that it would completely eliminate the high premiums and the deductibles and it is a financially viable move, residents and professionals within the state are debating that fact.
The support for this particular system is a bit mixed. The economic-based analysis from the financial experts that have evaluated the proposal are also mixed. This state-run program which has been officially proposed under the Amendment 69 is referred to as “ColoradoCare”.
The ColoradoCare proposal states that the system would require a 10% increase in payroll tax. Approximately two-thirds of that increase would be paid directly by employers. The remaining amount would need to be paid by the employees. This increase in payroll tax would place a total of $25 billion dollars within the new single payer insurance by the year of 2019.
That money would then completely do away with premiums and eliminate deductibles for the residents within the state. Additionally, it would help in covering the healthcare costs of the residents.
A report was recently released by the organization known as the Colorado Health Institute (CHI). This report states that this new single payer system would result in a savings of $2.7 billion dollars. This would be made possible by completely doing away with the administrative costs associated with healthcare and increasing the profits that stem from the private insurers. Unfortunately, the President of the CHI has indicated that this payer program could struggle in terms of keeping up with the rapidly increasing healthcare costs.
This CEO, Michele Lueck, has recently spoken to individuals at Colorado Public Radio that when the system is put into place, it could potentially result in a $253 financial deficit in the first year.
In addition to the deficit, it has been established that the program could end up with nearly $7 billion tied up in Medicaid waivers. That is a total of $4 billion less than the experts recommend.
As a result, the expected revenue of the program could be a lot less than forecasted. In 2011, Vermont attempted this same system. Unfortunately, it was eliminated in the year of 2014 because of shortfalls in funding and the induction of the Affordable Care Act. While many believe that it would be different in the State of Colorado, many continue to debate that fact.
