Posted on 04/05/2006 7:05:04 AM PDT by CSM
Tuesday, April 4, 2006 10:54 p.m. EDT Romney to Sign Mandatory Health Bill
BOSTON -- Lawmakers overwhelmingly approved a bill Tuesday that would make Massachusetts the first state to require that all its 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.
The cost was put at $316 million in the first year, and more than a $1 billion by the third year, with much of that money coming from federal reimbursements and existing state spending, officials said.
The House approved the bill on a 154-2 vote. The Senate endorsed it 37-0.
A final procedural vote is needed in both chambers of the Democratic-controlled legislature before the bill can head to the desk of Gov. Mitt Romney, a potential Republican candidate for president in 2008. Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said the governor would sign the bill but would make some changes that wouldn't "affect the main purpose of the bill."
Legislators praised the effort.
"It's only fitting that Massachusetts would set forward and produce the most comprehensive, all-encompassing health care reform bill in the country," said House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, a Democrat. "Do we know whether this is perfect or not? No, because it's never been done before."
The only other state to come close to the Massachusetts plan is Maine, which passed a law in 2003 to dramatically expand health care. That plan relies largely on voluntary compliance.
"What Massachusetts is doing, who they are covering, how they're crafting it, especially the individual requirement, that's all unique," said Laura Tobler, a health policy analyst for the National Conference of State Legislatures.
The plan hinges in part on two key sections: the $295-per-employee business assessment and a so-called "individual mandate," requiring every citizen who can afford it to obtain health insurance or face increasing tax penalties.
Liberals typically support employer mandates, while conservatives generally back individual responsibility.
"The novelty of what's happened in this building is that instead of saying, `Let's do neither,' leaders are saying, `Let's do both,'" said John McDonough of Health Care for All. "This will have a ripple effect across the country."
The state's poorest — single adults making $9,500 or less a year — will have access to health coverage with no premiums or deductibles.
Those living at up to 300 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $48,000 for a family of three, will be able to get health coverage on a sliding scale, also with no deductibles.
The vast majority of Massachusetts residents who are already insured could see a modest easing of their premiums.
Individuals deemed able but unwilling to purchase health care could face fines of more than $1,000 a year by the state if they don't get insurance.
Romney pushed vigorously for the individual mandate and called the legislation "something historic, truly landmark, a once-in-a-generation opportunity."
One goal of the bill is to protect $385 million pledged by the federal government over each of the next two years if the state can show it is on a path to reducing its number of uninsured.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has threatened to withhold the money if the state does not have a plan up and running by July 1.
Not meaningless at all. I chose the best option available to me. Even with the out of control spending and the inexplicable loss of his veto pen, Bush was still a far better choice than SKerry.
There is no perfect candidate. I vote for the one that comes closest to my ideals. Sometimes none are very close to that ideal, but I will never refuse to vote. Refusing to vote is effectively a vote for the winner.
Wow! What a nightmare. So much for "President Romney".
Not happening in a million years, especially now.
I agree, that is part of the problem. People (especially lawyers)should not receive massive windfall's when taking legal action.
The telescreen was giving forth an ear-splitting whistle which continued on the same note for thirty seconds. It was nought seven fifteen, getting-up time for office workers. The Physical Jerks would begin in three minutes. The next moment he was doubled up by a violent coughing fit which nearly always attacked him soon after waking up. It emptied his lungs so completely that he could only begin breathing again by lying on his back and taking a series of deep gasps. His veins had swelled with the effort of the cough, and the varicose ulcer had started itching.
'Thirty to forty group!' yapped a piercing female voice. 'Thirty to forty group! Take your places, please. Thirties to forties!'
Winston sprang to attention in front of the telescreen, upon which the image of a youngish woman, scrawny but muscular, dressed in tunic and gym-shoes, had already appeared.
'Arms bending and stretching!' she rapped out. 'Take your time by me. One, two, three, four! One, two, three, four! Come on, comrades, put a bit of life into it! One, two, three, four! One, two, three, four! ...'
'Smith!' screamed the shrewish voice from the telescreen. '6079 Smith W.! Yes, you! Bend lower, please! You can do better than that. You're not trying. Lower, please! That's better, comrade. Now stand at ease, the whole squad, and watch me.'
He stood watching while the instructress raised her arms above her head and -- one could not say gracefully, but with remarkable neatness and efficiency -- bent over and tucked the first joint of her fingers under her toes.
'There, comrades! That's how I want to see you doing it. Watch me again. I'm thirty-nine and I've had four children. Now look.' She bent over again. 'You see my knees aren't bent. You can all do it if you want to,' she added as she straightened herself up. 'Anyone under forty-five is perfectly capable of touching his toes. We don't all have the privilege of fighting in the front line, but at least we can all keep fit. Remember our boys on the Malabar front! And the sailors in the Floating Fortresses! Just think what they have to put up with. Now try again. That's better, comrade, that's much better,' she added encouragingly as Winston, with a violent lunge, succeeded in touching his toes with knees unbent, for the first time in several years.
"Romney to Sign Mandatory Health Bill"
Says it all, free health care (for some) will be paid for, even if they have to criminalize those who refuse it.
Actually, your other statement is not quite right. The size of government, in terms of spending, actually fell under none other than Bill Clinton. It has skyrocketed under George Bush.
Why that problem is virtually ignored, is a mystery to me. But I have a question (which is likely silly): are doctors/hospitals able to require a patient to sign a contract that eliminates all legal liability? And refuse to treat anyone who doesn't sign it?
You seem to be posting this on every one of these threads. Just curious as to whether you're under the impression that people who don't drink, smoke, do drugs, omit exercise, etc. never get sick or injured or have babies with birth defects or, I guess, die. (Among the people I know, admittedly rather a small number perhaps, it's the health nuts who spend the most time with various doctors -- it's almost like a hobby to them!)
You wasted your vote. It would have made more sense to vote for yourself (since it didn't determine the election anyway). Was Kerry worse? An equally good question is "Was Clinton worse? Bill Clinton actually cut government spending unlike the guy you voted for.
Marx would be proud.
and if anybody needs to see what socialism in America will bring;
all they need do is look at France!
I'm not sure you can buy just catastrophic health ins in MA -- what with all the mandated benefits, mental health care, in vitro fertilization, abortion (of course!), etc., etc. (Those are the ones I remember off the top of my head -- breaking from work -- I know there's many more.)
It used to successfully drive our health care system. If the employers refuse to offer it the cost will be passed to the taxpayer.
How does he manage that? I never heard of a company that let you opt out of health ins unless you could document that you were covered, say, by a spouse's policy.
I wonder, do you side with the "fire employees who smoke, even at home" crowd?
Maybe Vice Presidential material.
"Hillary / Romney 2008"?
I also said that they had been departing therefrom for a long time. They may have tried to secede, but they never did, did they? Thanks for punctuating the point though. All of that said, I stand by the comment regarding Mass's contribution and influence during the revolutionary war.
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.