I have no idea what this means, "SO"
Here's a picture of a squirrel drinking beer
Posted on 11/25/2007 7:07:26 PM PST by neverdem
BOSTON, Nov. 20 — As the Democratic presidential candidates debate whether Americans should be forced to obtain health insurance, the people of Massachusetts are living the dilemma in real time.
A year after Massachusetts became the only state to require that individuals have health coverage, residents face deadlines to sign up or lose their personal tax exemption, worth $219 on next year’s state income tax returns. More than 200,000 previously uninsured residents have enrolled, but state officials estimate that at least that number, and perhaps twice as many, have not.
Those managing the enrollment effort say it has exceeded expectations. In particular, state-subsidized insurance packages offered to low-income residents have been so popular that the program’s spending may exceed its budget by nearly $150 million.
But the reluctance of so many to enroll, along with the possible exemption of 60,000 residents who cannot afford premiums, has raised questions about whether even a mandate can guarantee truly universal coverage.
Additional concerns have been generated by projections that the state’s insurers plan to raise rates 10 percent to 12 percent next year, twice this year’s national average. That would undercut the plan’s secondary goal of slowing the increase in health costs.
“We’re going to be very aggressive in trying to get those numbers down to single digits,” said Jon M. Kingsdale, executive director of the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority, the agency that markets the subsidized insurance policies. “If we continue with double-digit inflation, I don’t think health reform is sustainable.”
The state’s experience should be instructive to the presidential campaigns, and to officials in California, where Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, has proposed a similar plan. Democratic leaders there initially rejected an individual mandate because labor unions argued that workers might not be able to afford coverage. They have recently reversed...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Individual States should consider legislation for their citizens to “opt out” of socialist programs proactively. That means, if people choose to, they cannot be forced to pay into a system, or ever to receive benefits from that system. Their right as a citizen of that State.
They could include a provision that the only way to force people in the future would be a referendum to change the State constitution.
The reason for doing this would be to set the State up to sue the federal government at the Supreme Court, if it ever decided to initiate any new socialist programs. Because citizens cannot directly challenge federal law, the State would then be able to do so on their behalf.
Agree on all points. Particularly, insurers should not be able to deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions. That’s the main thing that people don’t get. Even if you can afford it, you can be turned down for minor things. This doesn’t give self-employed people many options.
Look at this plan in Oklahoma. Do a search on “o-epic.” Granted it’s for lower income self-employed and employed but it’s an interesting plan.
Beware the power of inertia.
Any problems with the Massachusetts Health Care Plan and Mitt Romney’s Presidential chances will also seriously suffer. I don’t see problems not happening with this, especially since this is only the first year that this health care plan has existed, and having the Massachusetts government control health care instead of having only a private “entity” completely control it makes for many probable mistakes to occur during its entire duration of existence. Also, forcing all Massachusetts residents who don’t already have health insurance coverage to have this or else they will be punished the next time they have to pay taxes is truly not what the existence of the U.S. is really all about! Also, how many illegal immigrants throughout Massachusetts are also covered by this state health plan, and what is the total financial damage upon all of the law abiding state individuals because of this?
Mitt Romney — he brought new levels of socialism to Massachusetts and he wants to do the same nationally.
Absurd.
Mitt did not create this plan, he attempted to help make it work.
We are a socialist State in essence, really no longer part of the Democratic Republic of the United States of America.
Massachusetts represents what the Democrats have in mind for the rest of you.
You should be jumpin’ UGLY RIGHT ABOUT NOW!
Our Governor, Tinkie Winkie Patrick got elected with a slogan.. “Together, We Can”
I just wanna know what we are cannin’ cause it ain’t cranberries, it ain’t clams and it ain’t lobstahs.
We do however have taxes for our taxes and people leaving in droves, mostly going to take their Masshole ideas to other states. Hopefully they’ll die before they can register to vote
Actually, hopefully, they’ll all just die.
Sounds suspiciously like Barrie (M.Muslim) Obama.
“Mitt Romney — he brought new levels of socialism to Massachusetts and he wants to do the same nationally.”
I just hope Mitt sinks as fast as his healthcare fiasco.
Oh? How about you paying for your own “minor things?”
How about AIDS?
How about Hep C?
How about cancer?
Minor things like that? “force” insurers to offer that and rates will Skyrocket and make the following a wet dream of the “good old days” of merely double digit inflation.
>Additional concerns have been generated by projections that the state’s insurers plan to raise rates 10 percent to 12 percent next year.
Want “affordable” health care? - Get the government out entirely, from Medicare to Medicaid and everything in between and watch the cost of medical care plummet back to levels in line with the real free market principles that were in effect before 1964.
Fact is, the rates in Mass are going to increase like that for decades, and everyone behind the scenes knows it.
Welcome to the United Socialist States of America.
ROFLMAO....
Oh, Mitt is sure in overdrive trying to flee the very RomneyCare that he's been praising himself for all over America, but when he's said things such as:
* when asked what is the biggest difference between his RomneyCare and HillaryCare, Mitt said, "Mine got passed!"
By the way, where are the Mittbots to praise the implosion of Romneycare when you need them?
“or lose their personal tax exemption, worth $219 on next year’s state income tax returns”
That doesn’t sound like much to lose...
Is it?
I know. Preexisting conditions are the worst part of trying to buy an individual policy. Been there, done that.
What do you do when people are turned down for preexisting conditions? Let them die if they are ill? Or make them find jobs with employers who have more than “x” employees so that their preexisting condition must be covered under the employer’s plan?
I’ve been turned down for a “minor” temporary condition - nothing like you mentioned. I worked for a small firm that didn’t offer insurance. It was infuriating.
With 40-some million people uninsured (to quote the media), it amounts to 15+ million upset people because their lives can depend on obtaining health care. They are enough to swing the vote.
If a conservative candidate doesn’t come up with do-able health care ideas, good luck electing a conservative candidate. There are plenty of smart ways to do it. Conservative voters just have to get over the terms “universal” or “socialist” health care. It’s all a matter of semantics.
P.S. I’ve been a Freeper since 1998 regardless of what my screen name shows.
This is no business whatsoever of the government of the USA, and that is the point.
There are countless resources for such people who have deadly illness.
Contrary to popular PC, people were not dying in the streets prior to 1964.
>With 40-some million people uninsured (to quote the media),
Please. Subtract the minor children and the illegals, and you have then removed about 95% of that figure.
Not to mention that such care will attract those who cannot pay in droves. - Millions upon millions, and you want to race to the lowest common denominator with them, - leave us out please - Why do you think they are invading us right now? _ not for a slice of that Socialist pie, eh?
Try to back up those MSM claims. - You cannot - It is simply dogma.
>If a conservative candidate doesn’t come up with do-able health care ideas, good luck electing a conservative candidate.
We will do just that, without your luck, or even without you if need be.
>They are enough to swing the vote.
And so, dear Sir, are we.
>There are plenty of smart ways to do it.
No, there are not - But there are plenty of stupid ways to do it.
>Conservative voters just have to get over the terms “universal” or “socialist” health care.
No, they do not.
>It’s all a matter of semantics.
No, it is not. - Socialism is not a word game, it is a concept and an antlike way of life enforced by The State.
Get over it yourself. - Good day.
I have no idea what this means, "SO"
Here's a picture of a squirrel drinking beer
This health care plan is a menace to all Americans as is anyone who supports it.
This what it's all about in the most corrupt state in this country. Lining the pockets of the insurance companies in MASSACHUSETSS. Mass was one of, if not first state to have mandatory no-fault auto insurance, and that was forced on the citizens as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.