April 30, 2012 3:02PM 

# Letter Correcting Politico Article re States &amp; ObamaCare Exchanges 

By [Michael F. Cannon](https://www.cato.org/people/michael-f-cannon) 

---

<a class="js-popover-trigger cursor-pointer popover-trigger" data-bs-placement="bottom" data-bs-trigger="click" id="popover-trigger"> 

SHARE 

</a> 

*Politico* has run my [letter to the editor](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75692.html) regarding their article on [states refusing to create ObamaCare’s health insurance Exchanges](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75331.html):

> “[Right winning war on state health-insurance exchanges](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75331.html),” (POLITICO, Apr. 18) is false or misleading on several points.
> 
> 
> It mislabels me a conservative and the Cato Institute a “national conservative organization,” when both are libertarian. Cato scholars and supporters advocate reducing military spending, and legalizing drugs, gambling, and gay marriage.
> 
> 
> It states that Cato receives funding from “the Koch brothers” — who apparently lack first names. This claim is false. Cato now receives no funding from Charles or David Koch, and may never again.
> 
> 
> The Kochs’ past contributions to Cato have no bearing on this article — aside from the potential (and false) implication that the Kochs and Cato have a financial interest in persuading states not to create Obamacare exchanges.
> 
> 
> The article also quotes a Leavitt Partners employee who criticizes Cato’s position as reckless. Yet the article fails to mention that Leavitt does have a direct financial interest in creating exchanges: Politico has [reported](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57852.html) that Leavitt can’t hire staff fast enough for all the exchange contracts it is getting from state governments.
> 
> 
> Finally, the article states “most legal experts” think the Obama administration may offer health insurance tax credits and subsidies through exchanges created by the federal government, despite a lack of statutory authority. The article does not provide – and despite multiple requests, its authors have not furnished – any support for their claim of consensus.

Other than that, it really was a good article.

##### Related Tags 

[General](https://www.cato.org/general), [Government and Politics](https://www.cato.org/government-politics), [Health Care](https://www.cato.org/health-care), [Constitutional Law](https://www.cato.org/constitutional-law), [Tax and Budget Policy](https://www.cato.org/tax-budget-policy), [Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies](https://www.cato.org/robert-levy-center-constitutional-studies) 

[![Creative Commons License](/build/cato_2020/images/creative-commons.svg)](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) 
This work is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).