Skip to content

American Insurance NW Inc. Blog

All You Ever Wanted to Know About Insurance

Governor's 5 Reasons For Idaho Health Exchange

Idaho Governor Butch Otter's top five reasons for creating a state-based health insurance exchange are listed below. He strongly supports an Idaho Health Insurance Exchange and is asking Idahoans to sign his petition to State legislators urging them to choose an Idaho-based exchange over a federal exchange.  Visit to learn about an Idaho Insurance Exchange 

1. It is the best choice for Idaho.

I fought hard against the mandates and overreaching federal authority of Obamacare when I joined the lawsuit with other states, but despite my best efforts the law remains in place. After careful deliberation, I decided it was not in the best interests of the majority of Idaho's citizens to surrender full decision-making authority to the federal government by allowing a federal exchange to be established in Idaho.

2. It keeps the feds at bay.

Believing the state can ignore the requirements of Obamacare will result in a federal exchange being imposed on Idaho citizens. This would invite increased federal involvement in state affairs through further regulation of our insurance markets, enlargement of the federal bureaucracy and incurring federal fees for operating costs associated with running a federal exchange.

3. A federal exchange means higher costs.

It is in Idaho's best interests to implement a state-run exchange that would be funded at first through a series of federal grants. Going forward, exchange participants would fund the state-run exchange through user fees or assessments set by a local board. Keeping the exchange local would avoid the addition of a proposed 3.5-percent premium surcharge for policies purchased through a federal exchange to fund its operations.

4. State implementation of an exchange is consistent with our state's rights stance.

Ceding all control to the federal government means giving up any possibility of effectively pursuing local priorities regarding cost containment, quality control, regulatory control, accountability, job formation and a product tailored to our Idaho needs.

5. It's the law.

We may not agree with the Affordable Care Act or accept its mandates - I certainly don't. But elected officials are sworn to uphold the laws of our country. We are a nation of laws with established avenues for addressing our grievances. You all know how I feel about Obamacare. I will continue encouraging and supporting efforts by our Idaho congressional delegation and many others to repeal and replace the law. But the fact remains that for now and for the foreseeable future it is the law. And as responsible elected officials we're sworn to uphold the rule of law - not just those laws we support.

Visit the Governor's website my website to learn the facts about a state-based insurance exchange.  


Paul Durant

Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 9:59am PST

I’d like to all the assumptions, numbers and actuarial studies supporting the statement that costs would be less.

John Sullivan

Tuesday, February 5, 2013 at 11:42am PST

Hi Paul – I had the chance to hear Rep John Rusche at a town meeting last Saturday morning. He is on the committee that is studying all this. Very complex issues as it relates to Medicaide and county payments, etc. He also indicated at that meeting there would be a large ultimate savings over a Federal exchange. Not saying it costs all of us less than today but the choice is Federal exchange or State exchange – not no exchange. I was impressed with Rusche’s handle on these details. Perhaps you can get more details from him.

Del Rust

Friday, March 15, 2013 at 11:40am PDT

How can the rule of law apply in this case when the law itself is not authorized in Article 1, Section 8. POWERS OF CONGRESS ?
Please show me where.
I believe if you will research AMERICAN JURISPRUDIENCE @ 126d you will discover that any law that is unconstitutioaal at enactment is the same as no law , therefore NULL and Void……………………………