• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

Joan Henneberry, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing of Denver writes:

A September 22nd Rocky Mountain editorial argued that anything The Blue Ribbon Commission for Healthcare Reform in Colorado proposes would be overridden by Congressional action in Washington, D.C. To the contrary, the Blue Ribbon Commission’s tireless work is not in vain, but rather a very important step towards fixing our broken health care system, regardless of what happens at the federal level.
We must be realistic in assessing the likelihood of when or if a federal health care plan will be developed. The nation faces a transition to a new administration, changes in Congress, and managing the war and/or exit from Iraq. In other words, the new administration will be confronted with the same challenges we have here in Colorado: prioritizing many important needs and demands. And as we know in Colorado, crafting a health care reform package that will cover more of the uninsured, improve the quality of care in our system, and reduce overall costs and waste in that system is a daunting task.
We have a much better chance of coming to consensus on a Colorado health care plan that will work for our residents than Congress and a new President will have in agreeing on a national solution. States are already the creative force behind reform solutions. We cannot afford to wait on Washington any longer.
Colorado has the opportunity to set an example as a leading state in health care reform, and we should support the Blue Ribbon Commission’s work and thank its members for staying focused on a Colorado health plan.

This letter has not been edited.

READER COMMENTS

Let's hope that this "Blue Ribbon" commission to promote socialism fails as it already failed on all the rest of the planet. There is nothing "Blue Ribbon " about denying you choice or competition. Ritter is a moonbat. Monopolies are hostile to all consumers, dump 'em!.

Many health programs, like SCHIP, are hiding the truth behind false claims such as, if you aren't for it your against kids health care. The fact of the matter is SCHIP defines children as being up to 24 years old and sets the eligible income cap at $83,000. Rather than targeting poor kids and families that can't afford health care for their kids, the standards they set make a large population of people eligible which in turn opens the door to National Socialized Health Care.

Never mind that anyone 24 years old should either be working on a trade or working on their master's degree in college. Either way, to allow them to qualify for government health care is a joke gone bad.

And isn't it interesting that they want to tax tobacco, yet again, to pay for it. That might make more people quit smoking alright and taking even more tax money away from the program. Also tobacco products are heavily taxed but the nonsmoke nicotine delivery devices that pharmaceutical companies make and sell at enflated prices, which put a larger dose of nicotine in your blood stream than what you would get by going to a bar wherein there was second hand smoke, and which have been proven to have less than a 14% success in helping people quit, r are zero taxed.

The more people get hook on them, the less tax money for the state. In fact tobacco tax money is becoming a large part of the tax revenue. Tell me where will the tobacco control zealots make up for that lost revenue? Well it's you nonsmokers who thought it was such a grand idea to ban smoking, that's where the tax money will come from, you!

And. I say it's about time you paid up, Smokers have been doing it all for you but, less and less now until you get what you want. Everyone smoke free and freed of a lot of their money also, to make up for the tens and hundreds of millions of dollars in tobacco taxes.

And all along the way to banning things you thought , no sweat off my back. Hell, lets sock it to the filthy, degenerate, baby killing smokers. Well it's your turn in the tax barrel next and we smokers don't want to hear you screaming, it's not fair, it's unconstitutional, it violates my rights. Hope your happy to finance a health law that you thought we were going to pony up the money for.

Interesting concept.... I plan on taxing out of existence one group.... but now I dont have anyone to tax, but a huge .gov bureacracy to keep up....

We can't close SCHIP once we get it.... sooo... we have to get the money from somewhere.....Cigs are gone..... hmmm, lets see...TAXPAYERS!!!

Yeah, They don't need it... Hey Mikey!

Just another attempt at feel good legislation with no long term funding corresponding to it... oh, wait.. there is.... it's you.

Exactly Dravur, but be prepared for more lies from tobacco control. We have proven that they intentionally lied about three of their contentions: 1. Non smokers will flock to bars and taverns and make up for the smokers who left. If that were true one would expect bar and tavern revenues to remain at a steadily increasing revenue trend as they had for 6 quarters previous to the ban. Instead, Colorado Department of Revenue statistics prove a $ 16.9 million loss which takes revenue back to where it was in 2004.

2. Bans are good for business: See above.

3. Businesses that close and/ or loose money were marginal in the first place: What a lie that is, it's simple, the losses are not targeted to any one town, they are state wide statistics which would mean, according to tobacco control, the entire bar and tavern segment of the hospitality business all accross the state were marginal in the first place.

I would think any intelligent person would ask this question. If they knowingly lied about those things to get the ban passed, what else did they lie about. Well, how about the alledged dangers of second hand smoke?

As a matter of fact, that case is made by tobacco control advocates like ASH, the American Cancer Society, which also has been caught in intentional lies in Ohio and many other places, and other anti -smoking groups, based on payed for, on demand studies they organized after having to withdraw their law suit against OSHA's seven year study because a federal appeals court upheld OSHA's study and then they told tobacco control if they did not withdraw their suits OSHA would release an even more damaging report proving tobacco control claims were fabricated lies.

Those false, even fraudulent studies findings are directly contrary to the federal statutary regulatory findings of the preeminent federal agency charged with regulating the safety of workplaces and workers, OSHA. Who are you going to believe? Paid for, on demand studies designed specifically to support preconcieved contentions or OSHA's seven year study that proved second hand smoke in normally ventilated Bars and Taverns did not rise to the level of a health risk. You might not like the smell or even the people in smoking environments. but they are not the health risk claimed by Tobacco Control Zealots, far from it.

The ban was never about health, it's all about fanantical beliefs and the power and control they create that will only reduce tax revenue, destroy mom and pop businesses, and steal the future of thousands of people. Tell me, what good is done by that?

"...and/or exit from Iraq..."

Your socialist agenda is quite clear, but you surely missed the recent Democrat debats during which EACH AND EVERY front-runner indicated NO plans to leave Iraq. So, if you are voting for "change," don't hold your breath--no troops are coming home anytime soon. Think Korea.

And the Ritter Blue Ribbion commission is just another "feel-good" scheme (look, see, I'm doing something, I hear you) , nothing they propose is going to change the world's best health delivery system anytime soon, so don't hold your breath.

In order to insure the highest possible quality at the lowest possible price, America needs a healthcare system in which all its consumers get an opportunity to shop a competitive system an then make a choice in his/her own best interest with his/her (not someone else's) money. Monopolies, including health-care monopolies, are hostile to consumers. Monopolies produce the highest possible price with the least service.

Let's hope this Ritter avalanche of Blue Ribbon commision "feel-good" schems fails.

Why don't they start heavily taxing alcohol?

I don't have statistics,but there seems to be alot of alcohol related crashes.

A $5 -$10 per bottle or case tax.That would go along way in paying for handout programs the Democrats so love to come up with.

Oh,Wait that will never happen Teddy Kennedy and his reatives would have to pay for something they actually don't get free.

He'll never let that pass.

Though he did hold up a bill that would create a National Sex Offender Registry.He had some kind of earmark he had stuffed into the bill like he stuffs his fat ass into his pants and everyday.

Blue law sin tax eh Amen, I thought that justification had gone the way of prohibition and other zealous ideas that did nore harm than good. By the way, are you aware of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms intelligence gathering report citing information that terrorists may well be financing their efforts with money derived from the sale of blackmarket cigarettes.

Was that not the same thing with liqour under prohibition only instead of alien terrorists it was domestic terrorists, Organized Crime, that finance their rise of power and money that controled even the political powers in this republic of ours.

The leason of history is we forget the leasons of histroy. Banning things people want and use is only an invitation to blackmarket crime and, nothing else of value is ever attained as a result of bowing down to Zealousness and allowing it to influence legilative enactment of special interest laws.

A blue ribbon, I thought, Is a reward for excellence. Tell me, what blue ribbon committee has ever done anything that even approachs excellence, never mind solving any problem they were formed to consider solutions for. And, when they are composed of ploiticians and government employes who were the cause of the problem they are supposed to find solutions for in the first place, is that not kind of like having the fox guard the hen house?

POST A COMMENT

• Mike Littwin
• Iraq war not about “protecting our interests”
• Bill Johnson & CSU’s editorial
• Amy Goodman writing about Bush
• Ignorance no excuse
• Columbus & Thanksgiving days
• Neveah Gallegos
• Keeping track of at-risk babies