Massachusetts Universal Access Plan is "No Magic"

  1. the nation published a highly critical review of the massachusetts universal insurance plan.

    a close look, however, reveals that the new law may well be a fantasy and a triumph for special interest politics after all. "it's absolutely worthless," says dr. marcia angell, former editor in chief of the new england journal of medicine and author of the truth about the drug companies. "there is no magic in massachusetts."
    the law is yet another patchwork attempt to dodge the main obstacle to reform--a fundamental lack of agreement about equity in healthcare. americans still don't share equity as a universal value, so every endeavor to cover more people results in a complicated, contorted and underfinanced scheme. massachusetts's latest move is no exception. it pushes the country further away from national health insurance--with its essential ingredients of universal access, low administrative costs and limits on what medical providers can charge.
  2. Visit HM2VikingRN profile page

    About HM2VikingRN

    Joined: Apr '06; Posts: 11,159; Likes: 11,316

    2 Comments

  3. by   ZASHAGALKA
    The 'Right' bitterly criticizes it also, which makes me to believe that it is MORE of a compromise than most.

    Oh, I think national healthcare would benefit one thing: once the masses that DO actually pay their own way see the wholesale theft of their treasury, Democrats will never see national office again. I'm thinking of a Federal Gov't that looks strangely like the Texas gov't, of which, there are NO statewide Democrats in office.

    The politics in this nation are just not such as to pass a national healthcare initiative. Ask Hilliary about what happened in '94. Even IF such a plan were to be passed, the uproar would be such that the next decade would oversee a systematic dismantling of such a program. It would die before it ever got off life support. You just can't not only make the masses PAY for such a system in dollars, but in lowered healthcare. IT won't fly. Not in my lifetime. Thanks be.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on Sep 5, '06
  4. by   NRSKarenRN
    other states looking at one-payer:

    from healthleadersmedia.com:

    california governor announces he will veto healthcare bill
    highlighting the limits to his collaboration with democratic lawmakers, california gov. arnold schwarzenegger announced that he would veto legislation aimed at creating one state-run insurer to finance the medical expenses of all state residents.
    los angeles times, sep 6, 2006



    from physican's news digest:

    pennsylvania's first hearing on whether to require universal health insurance coverage hinted at the potential for a fight among financially powerful players such as insurers, health care providers and businesses, whose interests often are at odds.
    the state house insurance committee is holding a series of hearings on the issue to obtain feedback on whether pa. should require all adults to have health insurance, what kind it should require, what role employers should play, and whether the state should subsidize coverage for the poor, reported the patriot-news. the insurance federation of pennsylvania, which represents for-profit health insurers, said pa. shouldn't require everyone to have coverage until after it has done everything possible to hold down the cost of health insurance, and maintained that the majority of people with no insurance in pa. are relatively young and don't buy coverage because it costs too much, the patriot-news noted. highmark inc. said pa. should first take steps that include expanding existing programs to cover the uninsured and finding ways to hold down health care costs, while the pa. chapter of the national federation of independent businesses urged legislators to take steps to increase competition among health insurers, including allowing small businesses to band together to form larger groups with increased buying leverage, the patriot-news added. (patriot-news, august 23, 2006)

close