Warning: Medicaid is hazardous to your health

Warning: Medicaid is hazardous to your health by Brian T. Schwartz, Ph.D. Colorado’s 208 Commission has released detailed evaluations of its four favored health care reform proposals. The Commission’s goals include improving access, encouraging personal responsibility, and supporting a “financially viable, sustainable and fair” system. Yet these proposals preserve or expand Medicaid, which fails to meet these goals. This is documented in my free-market proposal, FAIR, and “Medicaid’s Unseen Costs,” a Cato Institute policy analysis.

Health Care Policy Center Journal: August 2007

Parents need to be advised that rigid, motorized pool covers are not a substitute for 4-sided fencing, because pool covers are not likely to be used appropriately and consistently.

Pediatricians should alert parents to the dangers that standing water presents to children. Parents need to be advised that they should learn CPR; and they should keep a telephone and equipment approved by the US Coast Guard (eg, life preservers, life jackets, shepherd’s crook) at poolside.

Is One Government for Each Person Enough in Colorado?

Before the end of 2007, Colorado will have over 3,000 governments. That is 3,000 entities with independent decision making on public policy and tax authority. This figure is significant in that the state eclipsed 2,000 governments in 1998. A growth rate of 40% in eight years is significant enough to raise concern about the direction of government.

How will Colorado pay for the coming prison boom?

Opinion Editorial August 6, 2007 By  Mike Krause This year the legislature created the Colorado Criminal and Juvenile Justice Commission, tasked with examining the state’s sentencing structure and making recommendations to the legislature to address the ever-increasing prison population. But if lawmakers lack the will to actually act on sentencing, then the commission will be […]

State Budget Scrutiny Reveals Ref C Shuffle

Two years ago, lawmakers asked for a “timeout” from the spending restrictions of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR) in order to allow the state budget to rebound from the recession of 2001-2002. Referendum C, approved by a narrow 52 percent to 48 percent margin, erased the tABOR spending limits for five years and permanently increased the spending caps thereafter. Voters were assured by Ref C proponents that K-12 education, colleges and universities, and health care would split the lion’s share of the resources if the measure passed. But a funny thing happened after Ref C passed. Spending on programs that rarely were identified with Ref C has grown at more than twice the rate of spending on education and health care. Now, some of the key players in convincing voters to pass Ref C are dissatisfied, and voters have cause to believe they were sold a bill of goods.