|
|
Blog |
|
|
|
One Way Massachusetts' Commonwealth Connector Beats Utah's Health Exchange
By: John R. Graham
3.11.2011
The range of current libertarian-conservative expert opinion on ObamaCare’s Health Benefits Exchanges has well-defined boundaries. On the one hand, there are those who believe that states are obliged to establish some sort of barebones exchange along the lines of the Utah Health Exchange in order to prevent the federal government from coming into a state and imposing a bloated contraption like Massachusetts’ Commonwealth Connector.
Others (especially myself) believe that the Utah Health Exchange is unimpressive, that no “exchange” can overcome certain bureaucratic necessities, and that states should therefore refuse to collaborate with ObamaCare, while waiting for it to be overturned by the Supreme Court or a future Congress and President. None of us has anything positive to say about Massachusetts’ Commonwealth Connector — until now! In one respect, the Commonwealth Connector is an extremely well-run government program, while the Utah Health Exchange is not. The issue is transparency.
Soon after I started writing critically about the Utah Health Exchange, I received e-mails and phone calls from a businessperson with a financial interest in the success of that enterprise, scolding me for using information was out of date. The new Utah Health Exchange, re-launched in 2011, is going gangbusters, according to a phone conversation that this businessperson had recently held with the exchange’s boss.
Sorry: Not good enough. Read the entire article here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
