This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
"Healthy Utah" or its equivalent is an economic winner for Utah. How do I come to that conclusion?
The economic calculation stems from its estimated cost of $78 million from the state versus its receipt from federal funding of an estimated $450 million, both annually. Assuming we receive $450 million, the velocity of money suggests those funds will be spent three to five times over in our stores. If it is four times, that implies infusion of funds into our state economy of $1.8 billion annually. The state collects 4.7 percent in sales taxes, so that means it collects $84.6 million. This is a minimum amount, given other revenue sources such as state income taxes. Thus, our Utah state government would collect more in revenue than it pays out.
Commencing in 2017, the state is supposed to pay 10 percent of the cost versus the federal cost of 90 percent. If the federal government were to cease paying the revenue, the proposed state legislation has an "opt out"provision.
That doesn't consider the humane aspects of taking those funds. The state would be covering medical benefits for an estimated 126,000 of our neediest citizens, the most important of objectives.
Ray Freer
Park City