Archive for 22/07/2008

The cost of “free” health care in Mass? Pushing $1 BILLION a year

Ahhh, you knew it would come sooner or later. Reality. It’s setting in on the much maligned Commonwealth health care plan, enacted during Mitt Romney’s tenure.

This opinion piece from the Wall Street Journal hits on just a few points and counterpoints as it points out the irony–and inherent untruthfulness–of the plan’s mantra: If everyone is covered, everyone’s cost will be lower.

Costs are soaring in Mass. Almost $1billion a year is now needed to fund the program, which STILL falls short of covering everyone.

Not surprisingly, the vast majority of new enrolees are in the state-subsidized plan–which in turns causes a larger burden on taxpayers.

Lawmakers in Mass. are “shocked” that so many people have opted for the the subsidized option. One word: idiots. Perhaps a more politically correct term: Unenlighted. Mandated benefits continue to tax the system.

Here’s my favorite paragraph from the article:

The Bay State has long served up coverage-specific insurance mandates, such as for fertility treatments, which raise costs. Yet in a just-deserts twist, Massachusetts health planners are now reviewing ways to trim mandates because the state is footing more of the bill, even if they didn’t care when imposing them on individuals and small business. A state-sponsored study shows that total spending on mandates was $1.32 billion in 2005, or 12% of premiums. The study is devastating despite its pro-mandate slant.

Just when politicians will finally figure out that MANDATES RAISE PREMIUMS, which in turn lowers participation, is anyone’s guess.

Never?

Now there’s a dose of reality.

Obama’s fuzzy math — promising to save each family $2500 a year in health care premiums

Finally — an explanation of Obama’s “promise” to “save” each American family $2,500 a year in health insurance premiums.

No, I am not kidding–that is precisely what he is promising. Of course, when a politician makes a “promise,” it should be taken with a healthy dose of sea salt.

In his case, Obama is pushing the envelope of believability beyond its boundaries.

In this article, the New York Times examines Obama’s fuzzy math.

Obama’s pledge to cut health care costs by $2,500 per family is nothing but stereotypical politician double-speak. For a guy who claims “change” as his mantra, Obama is as old-fashioned as they come in the political world.

There is absolutely NOTHING NEW in his proposal. If there really is $77 billion a year in waste in the health care field, do you really think WASHINGTON can cut that waste?

In part, Obama suggests that mandating insurance companies to accept all applicants regardless of health conditions will actually cut costs overall. How in the world he reaches that conclusion is beyond reason. His premise supposes that virtually NONE of those individuals will have claims–apparently. In reality, however, claims will rise exponentially when a disproportionate share of new enrollees have serious pre-existing health conditions, which cause premiums to RISE, not fall. And who is going to pay the actual premium for the 80% or so of the uninsured who CANNOT AFFORD the premiums? Huh?

Health care is a huge mess, rivaled only by the mess we’ve created for ourselves in the energy crisis.

There is no way Washington can fix it with the magic wand approach touted by the most liberal Senator in the Senate.

WordPress SEO