<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Colorado Senate Bill 88 Signed Into Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/05/24/colorado-senate-bill-88-signed-into-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/05/24/colorado-senate-bill-88-signed-into-law/</link>
	<description>Research and discussion of the Colorado health insurance industry and the healthcare crisis in America.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:34:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JL Sugden</title>
		<link>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/05/24/colorado-senate-bill-88-signed-into-law/comment-page-1/#comment-13148</link>
		<dc:creator>JL Sugden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 17:48:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/?p=1150#comment-13148</guid>
		<description>There may come a time when Colorado considers the whole question of the social/religious contract which we call marriage. It has evolved so far in the last 50 years that it needs to be rexamined. For now, Senate Bill 88 expands access to health insurance and that is a good thing for all of Colorado.  However, one aspect of the bill is problematic for me.   Given the tens of thousands of people employed by the state of Colorado, how can it be possible that only 79 new eligibles will show up for coverage?  This estimate sounds like a blatant attempt to understate any fiscal note to the bill.  I would wager that within a year, a lot more than 79 domestic partners will be included for coverage.  All progress being with the truth.  It&#039;s the only way to make rationale decisions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There may come a time when Colorado considers the whole question of the social/religious contract which we call marriage. It has evolved so far in the last 50 years that it needs to be rexamined. For now, Senate Bill 88 expands access to health insurance and that is a good thing for all of Colorado.  However, one aspect of the bill is problematic for me.   Given the tens of thousands of people employed by the state of Colorado, how can it be possible that only 79 new eligibles will show up for coverage?  This estimate sounds like a blatant attempt to understate any fiscal note to the bill.  I would wager that within a year, a lot more than 79 domestic partners will be included for coverage.  All progress being with the truth.  It&#8217;s the only way to make rationale decisions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
