NY Times Praises Massachusetts Model (single payer model):

[amborin]

<http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/opinion/09sun1.html>


"Massachusetts’s experiment in near universal health care coverage has become a favorite whipping boy for opponents of health care reform. They claim the program is a fiscal disaster and that the whole country will be plunged into a similar disaster if President Obama and Congress’s Democratic leaders have their way.

That is an egregious misreading of what is happening in Massachusetts. The state’s experience so far suggests that it is more than possible to insure almost all citizens and stay within planned budgets — although it will take great creativity and political will to hold down rising costs so that the program is sustainable...."


"Three years after the program began, 97 percent of Massachusetts residents have health insurance — by far the highest rate in the nation. That has been achieved without huge increases in state spending. "

/snip

[frazzled]

1. No, it's not in any way a single-payer model

It's similar to what is being proposed in the various committees in Congress thus far.

[brentspeak]

2. WRONG infomation in the OP header

RomneyCare is NOT "single payer" health coverage.

Repeat: The Mass. system is NOT "single-payer" health coverage.

The Mass. system mandates that all Mass. state residents purchase private health insurance. And since RomneyCare was imposed on all Mass state residents, the state of Massachusetts has the highest insurance premiums in the nation:.

[hughee99]

7. It is "single-payer" if you consider the "individual" the only payer

but in many cases, people forced into buying insurance they many not be able to afford are only able to afford something with high deductibles that doesn't cover very much, so in that respect, I'm not sure you can even call it "coverage". It provides "coverage" in the same sense that I can cover my house with a towel.

[democrat2thecore]

3. Single-Payer? No Way Is It Single-Payer -nt

[IndianaGreen]

4. Romney care? NY Times? That should ring alarm bells everywhere!

How about giving people the option to go under Medicare before they are 65? That's real single-payer!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

5. Ha, read the readers' comments in order of Readers' Recommendations

Always an instructive exercise.

[Bucky]

6. The mandatory coverage turns out to cover about 96% of the populace

It's not (as stated above) single payer, but it's a damn sight better than the system in Texas, where 24% of the population is uncovered. Think about those cost overruns and "social costs" when 1 out of 4 people entering the emergencies room in this state basically can't cover their own treatment. Think about the debts, the defaults, the resulting understaffing.

Mandatory coverage may sound harsh, but it quickly will start to reduce overall costs. You match that up with a strong public option and we will at least be able to start down the road to having a real healthcare system.

[brentspeak]

8. Massachusetts has the highest health insurance premiums in the nation

[dflprincess]

12. Coverage does not equal care

some people can only afford policies with high deductibles and copays and are still unable to see a doctor even with insurance.

We really need to get away from the idea that having health insurance and having access to health care are the same thing. If they were, there wouldn't be so many bankruptcies among those who thought they were "covered".

Mandatory purchase of a health insurance policy is just a scam to prop up a failing system.

[jberryhill]

9. TTIUWP

And I can see why they did:



That was the 1961 model. Didn't know about the "single payer" part...

[Mass]

10. MA insurance is nearly universal, but healthcare is certainly not single payer

(nor universal, given the number of people who have large copays and cannot afford the care).

Also, MA premiums are among the highest in the country.

[Cleita]

11. The "near universal health care coverage" should be a warning sign

for the gullible. It's proving to be expensive because they haven't cut out the for profit parasitical insurances and there is an increasing underclass that still isn't covered. Hasn't the NYT been co-opted by some RW corporation? I don't believe their "facts" at all because there are other studies out there that state otherwise.

[TomCADem]

13. What? MA Is Single Payer?