Massachusetts Moving Towards Socialized Health Insurance

Massachusetts lawmakers rushed the approval of a bill which requires that all citizens have some form of health insurance.

The plan — approved just 24 hours after the final details were released — would use a combination of financial incentives and penalties to dramatically expand access to health care over the next three years and extend coverage to the state’s estimated 500,000 uninsured.

If all goes as planned, poor people will be offered free or heavily subsidized coverage; those who can afford insurance but refuse to get it will face increasing tax penalties until they obtain coverage; and those already insured will see a modest drop in their premiums.

The measure does not call for new taxes but would require businesses that do not offer insurance to pay a $295 annual fee per employee.

This is a bad bill which may be popular politically, but will be disastrous in the long run. With or without knowing the details of the bill, any Massachusetts legislator should have known that. Still, the House approved the bill 154-2 and the Senate 37-0. According to estimates, this socialized health insurance is estimated to cost the state $316 million in the first year, and over $1 billion by the third year… The truth of the matter is that estimates are often lower than actual costs… remember the Big Dig?

There is no way this bill can work without health insurance costs going up, taxes being raised, or both. It will also hurt small businesses.

What’s really scary is how quickly this bill was approved. There must be so many unanswered questions and loopholes that are going result in a big mess in the future. If all citizens are required to have health insurance, does that include the unemployed and/or the homeless? Can homeless people claim a right to taxpayer funded health insurance (and ultimately health care) because of this bill?

Poor citizens, admittedly the biggest winners here, will also be a part of the problem. When access to health care becomes free, the natural tendency is to seek it out, even if it may not be necessary. Eventually, those of us who pay for health insurance, or whose employers pay for it, will end up having to pay higher rates, higher co-pays… probably higher everything. The only thing that will decrease is the quality of health care in this state.

We’re in big trouble.

Follow us on Twitter
Join us on Facebook



Matt Margolis is co-author (with Mark Noonan) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at The Buffalo Bean. Follow Matt on Twitter.


6 Responses to “Massachusetts Moving Towards Socialized Health Insurance”

  1. jodie says:

    Poor people in Massachusetts are already entitled to MassHealth (Medicaid). People who are homeless are eligible to apply for this as well already. That part isn’t changing. It’s people who make too much or haven’t already applied that will be effected.

  2. Bush on Health Savings Accounts

    President Bush has been promoting health savings accounts this week, and considering the recent passage of a socialized health insurance bill in Massachusetts, I think it’s worth taking note of Bush’s proposal. Here’s what Bush had to say about them…

  3. Pete James says:

    Thanks for the Post Matt. I mentioned it in my post too at Romney Report (http://romneyreport.blogspot.com/). I have not had time to decipher the legislation yet, but am wary.

  4. Brian says:

    Requiring everyone to buy health insurance will most likely decrease the cost of health insurance, not increase it. If everyone were to buy health insurance, the cost of medical care will be split by more people so the cost of insurance per person should decrease.

    Providing universal health coverage may also decrease the cost of healthcare. Many uninsured people will wait longer to treat medical problems because they are unable to afford treatement and by the time they seek treatment, their problem has become much worse and more expensive to treat.

    This bill will probably have little effect on the homeless and poorest people of the state since as Jodie said, they are already entitled to Medicaid.

  5. matt says:

    I don’t see it as a disadvantage that poor people will feel free to seek out healthcare when it “may not be necessary”. Anyone will tell you that catching health problems early saves money (i.e. prevention), and a trip to the doctor is not a trip to Dunkin’ Donuts.

Powered by Wordpress | Designed by Elegant Themes