Concerns that make for hyper-sensitive drawing of conclusions, and perhaps seeing boogeymen behind every curtain and legislative effort with language that sounds the same. Alas, my own post several days ago  attacking SB0324 might have been premature in its assumption that creating a licensure provision for health care navigators also created a default Michigan inclusion in the exchange. Writing

"By establishing the 'Director's' responsibilities and creating framework of a 'navigator' your bill is creating Michigan's participation in the exchange. It pretends protections, yet does NOTHING to protect Michigan citizens from the evil that is Obamacare and this catastrophic blow to our individual rights. Why are we providing ANY assistance to the federal government which is asserting authority is does not have into our health care choices?"

"Not true" according to legislative staffers, who explained the effort as more of a check and LIMIT on what could become a wholesale political get-out-the-vote effort for the progressives in power, versus a limited and licensed number of 'navigators' who might lose their status and outreach ability if stepping outside of their authority as specified.

Can you say epiphany?

As an aside, I am told that SB0324 will likely be amended to include language that asserts Michigan's acceptance or recognition of the Affordable Care Act will not be implied by this regulatory effort.