.jpg){kind=logo}
In a ram-and-jam style that would make Nancy Pelosi proud, Governor Ritter and his Democrat-controlled Legislature seem intent on driving business away from Colorado and crippling the ones that stay.
Not yet half-way through the session and there have been a barrage of bills to increase taxes, neatly circumventing TABOR by a single statement in a Court decision that opined that repealing tax exemptions were not really tax increases and therefore not subject to a TABOR vote of the citizens. (Ritter's "Dirty Dozen" HB1189-1198)
Other highlights:
Attempts that may be likened to mob extortion by the State to wrest more control or pay-offs from Pinnacol Assurance, the private sector funded workers comp insurance program. (HB1009; HB1012)
We got more than half a loaf in reforming PERA, but the structural problem still exists: why should public sector employees and spouse enjoy a generous Defined Benefit after retirement at age 60 until they die, when the best a private sector worker can hope for is a Defined Contribution to his or her retirement plan and a pathetic return on their confiscated Social Security payment? (SB001)
In a cynical move to offset the job-killing effect of Ritter’s Dirty Dozen and other State regulations to stifle business, an income tax credit of $4,000 to re-hire employees you couldn’t afford to keep in 2009. (SB133)
“Economic Justice” A limit on tax deductibility for salary and compensation in excess of $250,000. The Federal cap is $1M. It’s basically a message to business: don’t bring your national HQ to CO, and we don’t want successful small businesses either. (HB1263)
More “economic justice” – Rather than layoff employees, cut back their hours and then have each one file for unemployment insurance commensurate to their lost wages. That way, the State can redistribute the pain of the recession to the businesses that still have customers and are keeping their heads above water. (SB28)
DOA: Republican bills that are bonafide solutions to healthcare costs and accessibility – a moratorium on adding to Colorado’s 51 mandates and selling insurance across state lines. (HB1154; HB1163)
Also DOA: Republican bills to stop the madness of continual personal property tax by a pilot program to reimburse counties that stop receiving monies from personal property tax on items that are fully depreciated (SB085) and by creating a system that stops taxing fully depreciated items over a 13-year timeframe. (SB086)
Efforts to get some justice for the 39 Colorado auto dealerships that were arbitrarily shutdown when Government Motors took control of the company and the Chrysler bondholders saw decades of securities law turned on its head. (HB1049)
Nanny Statism at its finest: a proposed ban and severe penalties for those who manufacture or sell cosmetics, shampoos, sun screen, deodorant or any other product you put on or near your body that may have any of 700 trace elements that might cause cancer. (HB1248)
Read blog comments for more info on specific bills. The hits just keep coming! Stay tuned.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
HB1330 Hlth Claims Database Invades Privacy
HB1330: The All-Payer Database is a Transparency Trojan Horse
Exerpt from March 1, 2010 Opinion Editorial
By Linda Gorman
House Bill 1330 would create an "all-payer health claims database" in Colorado. Bill supporters claim government can reduce health care costs through "transparent public reporting of health care information." In fact, the bill is a transparency Trojan Horse.
It will make your most personal actions transparent to government officials, officials who have no business keeping track of what kind of health care you buy or what you pay for it. The bill authorizes the state to collect information on every health care transaction in the state, including information from private medical records, insurer files, and hospitals.
People who refuse to comply can be fined. There is no limit to the fines that may be assessed. The data that can be requisitioned and stored include individual information on physical functioning, medical treatment, supposed mental stability, marital problems, family structure, sexual habits, addictions, adherence to government health recommendations, and individual financial arrangements. If your teenager filled out the kind of questionnaire that is standard in pediatric practices, it may also contain information on whether you own a firearm, your household's illegal drug use, how well your child does in school, and whether your child or his friends have ever broken the law.
No one can opt out of the database the bill creates,... (which)is to be financed by gifts, grants, and donations from unknown sources with unknown agendas. The design of the database is controlled by an unknown "Administrator" who will decide who your data will be shared with and the form it will take. With no limits on how the data collected can be used to coerce individual behavior, this bill poses a grave threat to both medical privacy and individual liberty.
Linda Gorman directs the Health Care Policy Center at the Independence Institute.
Exerpt from March 1, 2010 Opinion Editorial
By Linda Gorman
House Bill 1330 would create an "all-payer health claims database" in Colorado. Bill supporters claim government can reduce health care costs through "transparent public reporting of health care information." In fact, the bill is a transparency Trojan Horse.
It will make your most personal actions transparent to government officials, officials who have no business keeping track of what kind of health care you buy or what you pay for it. The bill authorizes the state to collect information on every health care transaction in the state, including information from private medical records, insurer files, and hospitals.
People who refuse to comply can be fined. There is no limit to the fines that may be assessed. The data that can be requisitioned and stored include individual information on physical functioning, medical treatment, supposed mental stability, marital problems, family structure, sexual habits, addictions, adherence to government health recommendations, and individual financial arrangements. If your teenager filled out the kind of questionnaire that is standard in pediatric practices, it may also contain information on whether you own a firearm, your household's illegal drug use, how well your child does in school, and whether your child or his friends have ever broken the law.
No one can opt out of the database the bill creates,... (which)is to be financed by gifts, grants, and donations from unknown sources with unknown agendas. The design of the database is controlled by an unknown "Administrator" who will decide who your data will be shared with and the form it will take. With no limits on how the data collected can be used to coerce individual behavior, this bill poses a grave threat to both medical privacy and individual liberty.
Linda Gorman directs the Health Care Policy Center at the Independence Institute.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
PERA Reform - Sort of. SB10-001 by Sen. Brandon Shaffer (D) and Rep. Andy Kerr (D)
MODIFICATIONS TO THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION NECESSARY TO REACH A ONE HUNDRED PERCENT FUNDED RATIO WITHIN THE NEXT THIRTY YEARS
Status: 02/23/2010 Governor Action - Signed
SB001 raised the retirement age to 60, decreased the COLA from 3% to 2%, increased the number of years to average highest income from 3 to 4 (for purposes of determining the annual retirement benefit); the employers' (taxpayers) contribution level went up; the employees contribution level stayed the same or dropped; changed the surviving spouse benefit to require a minimum number of years on the job ,and reduced benefits for those who retire before the retirement age.
The plan anticipates a continued high rate of return on PERA investments.
SB001 goes a long way to solve the $30Billion anticipated deficit in the Fund, but the real solution is to restructure the program from a Defined Benefit to a Defined Contribution. The challenge is finding enough money to keep the extraordinary promises made to retirees while allowing younger employees to have a portable, private property right in their retirement account.
At its heart, there is a basic issue of fairness regarding PERA. How much paid retirement do private sector workers owe their public sector-working neighbors? Public sector workers are paid more than private sector workers and Defined Benefit plans in the private sector are virtually non-existent. By 2019, Social Security will only 70% of earned benefits. Why should the full responsibility for retirement benefits fall to entrepreneurs and wage earners?
MODIFICATIONS TO THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION NECESSARY TO REACH A ONE HUNDRED PERCENT FUNDED RATIO WITHIN THE NEXT THIRTY YEARS
Status: 02/23/2010 Governor Action - Signed
SB001 raised the retirement age to 60, decreased the COLA from 3% to 2%, increased the number of years to average highest income from 3 to 4 (for purposes of determining the annual retirement benefit); the employers' (taxpayers) contribution level went up; the employees contribution level stayed the same or dropped; changed the surviving spouse benefit to require a minimum number of years on the job ,and reduced benefits for those who retire before the retirement age.
The plan anticipates a continued high rate of return on PERA investments.
SB001 goes a long way to solve the $30Billion anticipated deficit in the Fund, but the real solution is to restructure the program from a Defined Benefit to a Defined Contribution. The challenge is finding enough money to keep the extraordinary promises made to retirees while allowing younger employees to have a portable, private property right in their retirement account.
At its heart, there is a basic issue of fairness regarding PERA. How much paid retirement do private sector workers owe their public sector-working neighbors? Public sector workers are paid more than private sector workers and Defined Benefit plans in the private sector are virtually non-existent. By 2019, Social Security will only 70% of earned benefits. Why should the full responsibility for retirement benefits fall to entrepreneurs and wage earners?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)