Single-payer equals a monopoly! No one would ever think of only one airline, oil company or supermarket. Why should there be only one health care provider? Competition is the bread basket of a free society.
President Jimmy Carter deregulated the railroads, airlines and telephones. What happened? Innovation accelerated, prices dropped and new companies emerged. Apple, Microsoft, Intel and other new startups brought us personal computers, laptops, computer games and smartphones. More recently, Uber brought competition to the regulated taxi industry, and consumers love it. Faster service, nicer cars, no need to carry cash or process credit cards, consumers and drivers rate each other and one knows how close the Uber car is to picking you up.
ColoradoCare, a single-payer system and a monopoly, might work for a few years, but government is notorious for low-balling costs to get acceptance of the program and later the costs explode. If one can move to Colorado and obtain essentially free health insurance within a year, think of how many ailing people might move here. Soon, the expenses explode, and the system has to raise taxes or limit care.
Auto, home, health and life insurance companies use actuarial data based on years of experience and thousands of settled claims to establish rates. Obamacare promised lower rates, more coverage, and “you can keep your doctor,” but expenses escalated and the promises were not kept.
When you have a single-payer or monopoly, those in control dictate prices and services – it is very hard to innovate. While Amendment 69 states that it has to be actuarially sound, there is a dearth of data. No one knows what the costs will be when everybody can obtain virtually free health care. Only experience over years will identify actual costs. By then, ColoradoCare will likely be in the same abysmal shape Obamacare is in. Since it is an amendment, changing course will be virtually impossible. I would like to thank Anita Cohen for her letter to the editor (Herald, Oct 4) regarding reasons to vote “No” on Amendment 69.
Lew Pratsch
Bayfield
