Posted by
Playful Walrus on Tuesday, June 03, 2008 10:50:38 AM
Let's see how socialism is "working", shall we? Steve LeBlanc, Associated Press Writer, brings us an update on universal health insurance in Massachusetts.
Nearly 100,000 Massachusetts taxpayers have been fined for failing to obtain health insurance, even as a major survey concludes the effort to create near-universal coverage in the state is meeting key goals.
I can’t believe that people are being fined for not buying insurance. I understand how it makes sense with car insurance while driving on public roads, which is a licensed privilege (and they only do it if you get pulled over), but is seems ridiculous that someone can be minding their own business, causing no harm to anybody else, and not taking public resources, and the state can show up at their door and fine them for not having health insurance.
A total of $9.7 million in fines was deposited into a trust fund to help cover the cost of the law. Monthly penalties for those who can afford health care but refuse will jump and could total as much as $912 for individuals by December.
Hey, what could go wrong with expanding government’s size and reach into our personal lives?
The uninsurance rate for Massachusetts adults dropped by more than half and residents were paying less in out-of-pocket health expenses, according to the report in the journal Health Affairs, which also found that low-income adults were more likely to have regular checkups and dental visits since the law took effect.
Doesn’t that all sound lovely? However, I bet this report fails to take into account the higher taxes and various detrimental effects on the economy. How many of those checkups were hypochondriac in nature?
Among the key findings in the report was the drop in the uninsurance rate among working-age adults from 13 percent to 7 percent. The biggest drop was among poorer residents.
So seven percent are still uninsured. But don’t worry – I’m sure the nanny state will track them down!
Low-income adults were more likely to have a place to go when they were sick and were more likely to visit a doctor for preventive care.
Everyone already has a place to go when they are sick. They just have to wait in line behind a bunch of illegal aliens. But I will say that these socialistic programs may have one benefit – encouraging preventative care. That, however, is outweighed be the downsides.
Despite the increase in the ranks of the insured, the study found little effect on the use of emergency rooms for non-emergency care.
So in other words, people are still misusing emergency rooms.
And the fear that employers would begin dropping health coverage as the new law took effect hasn't happened.
Let’s wait and see. Of course, I have to wonder if the employers have a gun to their heads?
Here’s the kicker you’ve been waiting for...
Long said the study also included good news for policy makers: 71 percent of working-age adults expressed support for the law.
That will come in handy as lawmakers struggle to find ways to cover the soaring costs of the law.
Soaring costs?!? No! How could that be? I think we know the solution: the 29% who didn’t express support for this law will be taxed even more.
In 2006, a legislative committee estimated the law would cost about $725 million in the fiscal year starting in July. In his budget, Patrick set aside $869 million, but those overseeing the law have already acknowledged costs will rise even higher.
Surprise, surprise. And of course, guess who is first in line to pay up?
Lawmakers are hoping to close the gap in part with a new dollar-per-pack cigarette tax.
Of course. But what happens when more people quit smoking, or buy cigarettes from outside the state or on the black market?
Hey politicians: No thanks. I don’t want to be subjected to this program. As I've asked before: What makes anyone think that universal health insurance will turn out better than universal public education?