Response to Sen. Corey Gardner
Your response regarding health care financing is wrong — creation of multiple smaller risk pools is the most costly, economically unsound health care financing. A single large risk pool, i.e. Medicare for All, is the most economically and actuarially sound health financing, preventing all high-risk insured from being forced into one small risk pool, bound to be overwhelmed by costs.
Only a large single-risk pool insurer has the economy of scale to negotiate global budgets and bulk rates for pharmaceuticals and medical equipment. Mischaracterization of Medicare for All as "socialized medicine" is wrong — it is single financing for private and public providers, not like the VA or England, where providers are hospital employees.
People want full choice of providers — available only with Medicare — not a choice of fragmented multi-payer health insurances that continually drive up costs and cut benefits while shrinking provider networks to benefit insurers' bottom lines.
We need Medicare for All!
Michele Swenson, Denver
Eric Budd changes his mind on locally owned utility
Xcel proposes a move to 55 percent renewable energy, but it's just that: a proposal. It's unlikely to be realized, and even if it were, we would only be halfway to our goal. The more likely scenario is another 20 years with 70 percent of our electricity generated from fossil fuels. To suggest that this approach is to "move forward with a strong local strategy" misses the point that Xcel is a massive for-profit, investor-owned and managed company that is rewarded for building highly centralized power generation and is completely insulated from the volatility of fossil fuel prices because they pass on those costs directly to us.
I would urge Boulder City Council candidate Eric Budd to remain focused on a future for Boulder that delivers on our commitment to 100 percent clean energy, keeps the $30 million of annual Xcel profits in our community and encourages our world-class entrepreneurs to pursue cost-saving energy innovations, flexible generation, demand side management, efficiency measures for buildings and on-site storage.
The monopoly of the last 100 years has delivered electrification of the West but at great cost. The future of energy is local distributed generation, with its inherent stability to manage the impacts of extreme weather. To deny Boulder businesses the opportunity to innovate using a 21st-century intelligent-energy grid, complete with a 21st-century fiber-optic network alongside buried power lines, sends a very outdated message to a business community that strives to be on the cutting edge of sustainability.
I agree this journey is hard, but change always is, so let's remain excited by the opportunities and meet the challenges head on and vote yes on 2L.
Ian Harrison, Boulder