Posted on 01/29/2008 3:46:33 PM PST by pissant
As he campaigns across the country this week in anticipation of the Super Tuesday primaries, Mitt Romney probably won't say much about the storied health care plan he signed into law as governor of Massachusetts.
For one thing, it is hard to portray yourself as the ideological heir to Ronald Reagan when your health care plan is virtually indistinguishable from the one proposed by Hillary Clinton. But another reason Romney may not want to talk about his plan is that it has been a dismal failure.
The Massachusetts plan was supposed to achieve universal health coverage while controlling costs. As Romney wrote in the Wall Street Journal, "Every uninsured citizen in Massachusetts will soon have affordable health insurance and the costs of health care will be reduced."
Or not.
Before RomneyCare was enacted, the number of uninsured Massachusetts residents was estimated at 618,000. Under the new program, about 300,000 previously uninsured residents have signed up for insurance. But of these, 169,000 are receiving subsidized coverage, proving once again that people are all too happy to accept something someone else is paying for. Another 70,000 people have also been enrolled in Medicaid, meaning a total of 239,000 people are receiving taxpayer-funded health insurance. Of those who have signed up for insurance since the plan was implemented, slightly more than half have received totally "free" coverage. Only 60,000 unsubsidized residents have bought insurance in order to comply with the mandate.
And though the subsidies have increased the number of Massachusetts citizens with insurance, as many as 300,000 Massachusetts residents have failed to buy the required insurance. Thus, half of those who were uninsured before the plan was implemented remain so.
The Massachusetts plan might not have achieved universal coverage, but it has cost taxpayers a great deal of money. It was originally projected to cost $1.8 billion in 2008, but it is now expected to exceed those estimates by $150 to 400 million. Over the next decade, projections suggest that RomneyCare will cost $2-$4 billion more than was budgeted. Given that Massachusetts is already facing a projected budget deficit this year, the pressure to raise taxes, cut reimbursements to health care providers, or cap insurance premiums will likely be intense.
The cost of the Massachusetts plan is also likely to continue rising, because is has failed to hold down the cost of health care. When Governor Romney signed the bill, he claimed "a key objective is to lower the cost of health insurance for all our citizens and allow our citizens to buy the insurance plan that fits their needs." In actuality, insurance premiums in the state are expected to rise 10-12 percent this year - twice the national average.
A major cause is that the new bureaucracy the legislation created - the "Connector" - is not allowing Massachusetts citizens to buy insurance that "fits their needs." For example, the Connector's governing board decrees that by January 2009, no one will be allowed to have insurance with a deductible higher than $2,000 or total out-of-pocket costs of more than $5,000.
In addition, every policy will be required to provide prescription drug coverage, a move that could add 5-15 percent to the cost of insurance plans. A proposal to require dental coverage failed narrowly, but the dentists - and several other provider groups - have not given up the effort to force its inclusion. This comes on top of the 40 mandated benefits the state had previously required, ranging from in vitro fertilization to chiropractic services.
Romney now says that he cannot be held responsible for the actions of the Connector board, because it's "an independent body separate from the governor's office." But many critics of the Massachusetts plan warned him precisely against the dangers of giving regulatory authority to a bureaucracy that would last long beyond his administration.
Executives often blame others for the failures of their own policies, but that's not a tendency one looks for in a candidate. Romney claims he is a "true conservative" with the business expertise to "get things done." Judging by his experience with health care reform, far from it.
ABOUT THE WRITER
Michael Tanner is director of health and welfare studies at the Cato Institute and the author of "Leviathan on the Right." Readers may write to the author at the Cato Institute, 1000 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20001; Web site: www.cato.org. For information on Cato's funding, please go to http://www.cato.org/sponsors/sponsors.html.
Gee, who would of thunk it?
Ah, doing the Manchurian Candidate’s work now.
Good question.
Rudy McRombee are all the same to me, Punchdrunk. They all need to be exposed.
I guess if romney goes down in florida at least it means the GOP won’t get stuck with supporting this plan
Gotta figure a way to get a conservative back into the race.
The rest are waiting for their rebate checks so they can buy in.
i’ve been telling people this for weeks.
although, i’d support Romney over McCain any day....
the contrived polls were a plot to get Rudy out of the picture for the Clintons and it looks like the geniuses in Florida fell for it hook, line, sinker.
Now Romney and McCain will be easy to pick off for the Clintons.
Yes, I hope Romney doesn’t win Florida. It’s a winner take all state so I really hope he loses. McCain may be a horrible choice but he still beats Romney.
Good thing Romney was able to keep the liberals in Mass from having the government totally take over healthcare. Mitt did the best he could.
LOL. I like the registered trademark. Same with the gay marriage and $50 abortions.
Sad thing is, Democrats are picking who they love the most and we are picking who we hate the least. It’s a loser for us no matter what.
I am tired of politicians pissing down my back and telling me that its rain.
Canada has a one-size fits all health care plan of the type Hillary advocates. It is a bigger failure than the Japanese national health care system which allows competitive plans, turns out a surplus of doctors and produces pharmaceuticals which are both innovative and competitive in price.
Our current health care system is partially socialized and partially broken down as a result. It would fit somewhere on the scale between Japan and Canada. So would the Massachusetts system. Socialism is Communism sold by the drink. It would be better if we were all T-totalers. But if we must drink, choose something that is more filling and less alcohol.
Ha!!
I’m going to need a bottle of Bacardi 151 after this election season.
Healthcare is BROKEN in the US. And the reason is costs are escalating at between 3 and 4 times the CPI. No one in his right mind can call a system with exploding costs as working.
I give credit to Romney for atleast making an attempt to change the broken system. Many different changes are coming to national health care. The voters will see to that. We just do not know whaich is the best COMPROMISE of all options.
Nice strawman. Romney is just as liberal as McLame is.
Hmmmm....and what will “the best he could” do when he is up against the Liberals in Congress?
Romney wasn’t trailblazing when he proposed the RomneyCare legislative bills.
Similar plans had already been made law in Tennessee, call TennCare, in New Jersey, Gov. Florio’s healthcare reform in NJ, in New York, through a series of smaller pieces of legislation and court decisions, and Oregon, in 2006, the voters voted down a universal healthcare plan for their state that was remarkably simliar to the original plan Mitt Romney proposed for Massachusetts.
TennCare had the same affect of massively increasing state government outlays for subsidized health insurance and medical costs, nearly bankrupting the state and literally having tens of thousands of Tennessee citizens surround and blockade the State house.
In NJ, the “New Jersey five state plans” law has also forced insurance costs for individual coverage to increase at twice the national average. It also forced out over 70% of the health insurance companies from selling policies in the state, it was simply good business to abandon NJ. New Jersey was also one of the first states to require that X% of every premium dollar be set aside for claims. Romney took the worst pieces of NJ’s legislation and tried to polish the turd.
Romney had several THOUSAND health insurance and medical community professionals straight out tell him his plans were unachievable, actuaries were contracted by various lobbyist groups and they had reports made to show Romney the total failure of his plan. Romney forged ahead in the face of irrefutable documentation that his universal health plan would be a near complete failure in the medium and long term.
Romney went out of his way to destroy the largest industry in the state of Massachusetts, the health care industry is in serious and possibly irreversible decline in Massachusetts due to Romney forcing the claws of the bureaucracy to sink deep into the funding lifeline of the medical system.
ANYONE who tries to sell you the idea that Romney didn’t fully and comprehensively have full knowledge of the failures of his plan at least 8 months before it was put to vote by the Mass legislature is not only lying to you, but is your enemy, and the enemy of your family.
Romney isn’t planning on switching parties after he’s elected...
That is why we should be electing conservatives like Hunter. Guys who want to unleash market forces on medicine by gutting the regulatory monster.
I don’t think it is even remotely accurate to say that Romney’s health care plan is similar to Hillary’s.
Moreso, just not as mentally unstable.
We'll all need to be sober to shoot straight.
Remember that the Soviet Union made vodka cheaper than safe drinking water. There was a reason for that-- a drunk populace is a compliant populace.
Take just enough to deaden the pain. Stay optimistic. Remember that even Massachusetts and New York voted for Ronald Reagan after four dark years of Jimmy Carter. God still watches over this country despite all the fools in it.
thanks for the info on the other states.
Uncle Sam, just like Tennessee did
10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.In fact, since we're discussing health care, Jefferson reflected on the Founder's division of federal and state government powers when he noted that the Founders had trusted the states, not the federal government, with the care of the people.
"Our citizens have wisely formed themselves into one nation as to others and several States as among themselves. To the united nation belong our external and mutual relations; to each State, severally, the care of our persons, our property, our reputation and religious freedom." --Thomas Jefferson: To Rhode Island Assembly, 1801. ME 10:262 http://tinyurl.com/onx4jThis post (<-click), while addressing a tax related thread, attempts to explain how FDR's disdain for 10th A. state powers created an environment where federal politicians like Senator Clinton wrongly propose federal legislation based on non-existent federal powers.
(Should anybody feel inclined to comment about the above referenced post, please do so in this thread.)
On the other hand, the people can always exercise their Article V powers to amend the Constitution to formally authorize the feds to administrate health care. Until that time, however, health care issues remain a state power issue.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, the people need to reconnect with the intentions of the Founder's where the division of federal and state government powers is concerned, particularly since the 10th A. is practically ignored these days. The people need to quit sitting on their hands and petition lawmakers, judges and justices who are not upholding their oaths to defend the Constitution, demanding that they resign from their jobs.
RomneyCare is Hillary Care is Socialized Medicine is Government/Insurance Company Collusion.
I noticed that Romney has taken my advice from a previous Free Repulic Post in which I pointed out that he didn’t pronounce the word “legislature” correctly.
On today’s Rush Limbaugh show, an audio clip of Romney has him saying “ledislature”, and then quickly correcting himself with the utterance of “legislature” at least twice later.
If indeed he has taken advice from Free Republic postings, (as I think he has), then it would only be prudent to scan the postings on this thread, and as soon as possible find some way to apoligize or repudiate the ugly State mandated medical care scheme he saddled Massachusetts residents with.
Early return, pissant - your boy is ahead. All hail McNut
Mccain ain’t my boy. I’d vote for Paul before I voted for McQueeg.
The road to the hell of liberals is paved by RINO intentions.
Thanks Mitt for doing your part! It couldn’t of been done with out you! You were the key.
Romney
"Hillary Clinton is very much right, it does take a village, and we are a village and we need to work together in a non-skeptical, no-finger-pointing way. . . ."
The Boston Globe quoted, 1998:
eenie meenie minee moe, catch a rino by the toe
No matter who wins tonight Conservatives will lose.
It must be rectified at the Convention.
And socialized medicine won't repair it. Certainly not Romney's version of it.
“The best hope for a brokered convention and a true conservative nominee to emerge (he might be named Fred Thompson)”
You are out of your freaking mind. Nothing is going to be rectified in this little mythical convention.
You’re the one in bed with McCain. Enjoy your stay, liberal.
Romney’s plan was and is absolutely dependent on Federal subsidies for enrollees with income up to 300% Federal welfare levels.
Romney’s plan only made it to fruition because of Federal waivers that Romney and large hospitals in Massachusetts lobbied for regarding the state’s Medicaid and SCHIP reimbursement payments to the tune of 385 million dollars a year in 1997 dollars, plus yearly upward adjustments.
Massachusetts Medicaid 1115 Waiver.
Original Waiver (FY97-02).
1st
Extension (FY03-05)
2nd Extension (FY06-08)
I don’t know what the MassHealth SCHIP waivers are called offhand.
The Medicaid 1115 waiver expires 6/30/08. Romney knew this BEFORE he sent a draft bill to the legislature.
EVERYONE knew about Tennessee’s failure of TennCare by then, Romney took the same untenable position as Democrat Gov. Phil Bredesen in Tennessee, and Romney did so knowing he was leaving office and the mess would be dumped on someone else’s desk and on the pocketbooks of Massachusetts and US taxpayers.
Arguing that RomneyCare and HillaryCare is differentiated because of 10th Amendment positions is patently and blatantly ridiculous at face value, what other motives you have for making the argument one can only surmise a guess.
Thank you for replying. Given the details of RomneyCare which you have provided, I stand corrected concerning the assumptions that I made in my post. Regardless, I hope that people understand the point that I made about health care being a state power issue.
In theory we are in agreement with States Rights issues.
Regarding health insurance though there is very few medical benefits providers and health insurance companies in the United States that don’t fall under Commerce Clause Federal oversight as the Commerce Clause is currently construed due to the companies having nexuses in multiple states. Even if we returned to a strict Constitutional interpretation of the Commerce Clause, most health insurance companies would still be regulated under the Commerce Clause.
States Rights regarding insurance companies so far has only acted as firewalls to keep the worst ideas contained while they play out their lousy scenarios, i.e. the SCHIP pilot programs, and states requiring coverage of certain procedures, alternative medicine, NJ making companies give health insurance to same sex spouses, and NJ forcing companies to offer psychiatric treatment to employees who might be drug addicts. All of this has been shown to be failures, all of these were included in Clinton’s 1994 plan, all of it will eventually be included in ANY national universal health coverage due to bureaucracies requirements to grow continuously to feed itself.
It would be nice to know how much Massachusetts was spending on healthcare for the uninsured prior to Romneys healthcare thing. Without that data it is impossible to judge whetehr the program increased or decreased costs to the taxpayer.
I need to review the Commerce Clause. So keeping in mind that I'm still making some assumptions here (I'm tired after a long day too), I'm going to make a distinction between the power of the feds to regulate interstate commerce versus the constitutionally unauthorized spending of federal tax dollars for health care. In other words, regardless that the feds can continue regulating inter-state health care insurers, the feds need to stop illegally spending our tax dollars on health care and appropriately reduce our federal taxes.
Again, if the people want the feds to spend money on health care then they can exercise their Article V powers to amend the Constitution to authorize the feds to do so. In the meanwhile, everything's a mess. :^(
What am I overlooking?
http://tinyurl.com/npt6tThe consequence of widespread constitutional ignorance is that the federal government is essentially free to walk all over the people's freedoms.
http://tinyurl.com/hehr8
Also, as I've mentioned elsewhere, the people need to reconnect with the intentions of the Founders, particularly where the Founder's division of federal and state powers is concerned. The people need to wise up to widespread federal government corruption where the scandalous ignoring of the 10th A. is concerned and petition lawmakers, judges and justices who are not upholding their oaths to defend the Constitution, demanding that they resign from their jobs.
This highlights the bait-and-switch manuever of the Democrats when talking about their healthcare proposals: teh focus the debate on how people and companies will be fined/forced into paying for insurance while ignoring the elephant in the room: the large numbers of people who will have their insurance paid for by the state. That is what the Dems do not want to talk about - and Romney’s plan shows why
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.