Lots of folks in the healthcare debate like to point to Massachusetts' healthcare system as a model for what they want in the US. The system--passed while Mitt Romney was in office with his leadership--is in fact, a view of the shape of things to come in this country.
First of all, it did indeed extend coverage to nearly all of the state's residents (merely 2.5 per cent lack coverage)--and it did so with the nation's first healthcare insurance mandate.
But--like the plan moving through Congress--it did not focus on cost containment. And so, 3 1/2 years later, state spending on healthcare is up 42% AND those with private insurance face the highest premiums in the nation.
What's going on here? Well, bad policy for one thing. Mitt Romney's my man for the nom in 2012, but he's going to have a tough time explaining this one. I'm not opposed to mandatory health insurance, but they simply didn't incorporate enough market reforms to lower premiums/control costs.
Secondly, supply and demand. Lots more people now have to buy insurance, so the price has gone up.
This looks like another Dukakis "Massachusetts Miracle".
Monday, January 11, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
It's been my experience they like to point to Denmark and France as to how socialized medicine should be run.
In France they pay premiums, deductibles, co-pays etc. just like any other insurance. Plus about three quarters of the population feel the need to buy supplemental insurance. And, every day that passes it goes further and further into debt. The bottom line is it is unsustainable.
And other thing, if French footballers David Trezeguet or Thierry Henry blow their knee out, they'll be on plane for the States faster than you can say parley vous hubba hubba.
Post a Comment