Friday, October 7, 2016

Who are these supposed Coloradans for Coloradans?

I've notice that even the notorious climate science denial Chicago PR firm Heartland Institute has gotten into the act of bashing Amendment 69.  In response I thought I'd share this bit of information about who's funding the massive advertisement flood in Colorado. 

"Coloradans for Coloradans" Funding Neither For Nor By Coloradans

Opposition Group 99% Bankrolled by Big Money from Corporations, Insurance Industry

Denver, CO - The first campaign finance reports of the election year drew a stark contrast between the "people over profits" campaign in support of ColoradoCare, Amendment 69, and the corporate insurance industry interests that are lining up to defeat it. 

If contributions equated to votes, Amendment 69 would pass with 98.64% of the vote, based on the campaign finance reporting of ColoradoCareYES and the opposition group Coloradans for Coloradans.  Of the 1,108 contributions both campaigns received from registered voters in Colorado, 1,093 of them were in support of ColoradoCareYES as opposed to 15 for the opposition.

"Unfortunately for the inaptly named Coloradans for Coloradans, their fundraising reflects the character of the corporate insurance industry whose grip on health care they are trying to defend," said Owen Perkins, Director of Communications for ColoradoCare.  "To preserve a status quo that puts profits first and prioritizes eight-figure CEO salaries over the well-being of patients, Coloradans for Coloradans collected 99.85% of their funds from corporations."

Industry giants like the Ohio-based Anthem contributed up to a half a million dollars apiece to protect their interests and defeat Amendment 69, while actual individuals accounted for only $1,640 raised.

By contrast, 99.75% of ColoradoCareYES's contributions were from individuals, with 94% of the money raised coming from within Colorado. 
While the opposition may crow about a 7-to-1 advantage in fundraising, ColoradoCareYES is proud to have 40 times as many donations as Coloradans for Coloradans, and an 80-to-1 advantage in contributions from individuals. 

"Corporations certainly can attempt to buy elections with big money, but campaigns remain in the hands of voters," said Senator Irene Aguilar, MD, one of the measure's chief architects. "The source of the campaign contributions reinforces what residents of our state have acknowledged from the start: the outside interests funding the opposition campaign are looking out for corporate profits, not for Coloradans."

In addition to $500,000 from Anthem (Ohio), the opposition was bankrolled by other industry interests,  including SCL Health, ($100,000), Davita, ($75,000, Washington State), and Cigna Health and Life Insurance ($40,000, Pennsylvania).  They also received $50,000 each from the oil and gas industry and building contractors.

If Amendment 69 passes on the November ballot, the insurance industry will no longer dominate the discussion and dictate the decisions patients and their providers should be making regarding individual health care.  ColoradoCare - a nonprofit, independent cooperative owned by and answerable to the residents of Colorado -- will eliminate premiums to the insurance industry, do away with deductibles, and provide primary and preventive care without co-pays.  By making every Coloradan a member of the pool and a beneficiary of the plan, ColoradoCare will achieve true universal health care while saving the residents thousands of dollars a year for a collective $4.5 billion in savings.

Funding of Support and Opposition for Amendment 69 (ColoradoCare)
for reporting period 1/1/2016 - 4/27/2016
"Coloradans for Coloradans"
Number of Contributions1,21429
% Donations from Corporations0.25%99.85%
% Donations from Individuals99.75%0.15%
% Funds Raised from Colorado94%38%
Average Donation$126.61$35,642

ColoradoCareYES spokespeople Senator Irene Aguilar, MD and T.R. Reid are available for interviews.  For more information on ColoradoCare and Amendment 69, visit
Source:  ColoradoCareYES Press Release, 5/3/2016

No comments:

Post a Comment