High-risk pool will cover people who were denied because of pre-existing conditions

Good morning. Here's a look at news reports from around the state on issues of interest to the Colorado Center on Law and Policy for Wednesday, July 7, 2010. Listing does not imply endorsement of the content.

HEALTH POLICY
The Denver Post: Ritter details Colorado's new high-risk health-insurance pool
Colorado will receive $90 million in federal money to subsidize health insurance for up to 4,000 people rejected by private insurers because of pre-existing medical conditions, Gov. Bill Ritter announced Tuesday.
Also: Denver Business Journal: State offers plan for pre-existing conditions
Also: Associated Press via Colorado Springs Business Journal: Gov. Ritter unveils new health insurance plan
Also: KDVR-TV: Ritter rolls out first phase of health care reform
Also: KCNC-TV: Colo. Unveils Coverage For Pre-Existing Conditions
Also: KMGH-TV: New Health Plan Covers Those With Pre-Existing Conditions

Colorado Springs Gazette: Woman's health insurance coverage threatened by a penny
The problem started after Carrington, 52, lost her job as an admissions representative with Alta Colleges and COBRA kicked in. Under the federal COBRA law, people who lose their jobs under certain circumstances can temporarily keep their group health insurance from their employer, but they have to pick up a larger share of their premium — in her case, a little over $471.87 a month.


FISCAL POLICY
Denver Post editorial: Ballot item could cripple Colorado
Amendment 61 is a dangerous measure that would prevent state and local governments from providing basic infrastructure.

Colorado Springs Gazette editorial: More mud thrown at our frugal city
Another day, another hatchet job on Colorado Springs for declining a large tax increase last fall in the midst of recession — as voters have done throughout the country.

Grand Junction Sentinel commentary: Punishing the unemployed is poor economic strategy
Republicans are more concerned about the $33 billion relief would add to the federal deficit than they are about the unemployed. Some Republicans have even argued that some of the $37 billion appropriated for job creation through stimulus spending should be used instead for paying unemployment.

Grand Junction Sentinel editorial: Benefits extension a necessary action
Those who argue that extending benefits will simply provide a disincentive for people to find jobs apparently haven’t been job hunting themselves lately.