Massachusetts
Experiment in Socialized Medicine - Republicans May Spend Hundreds of
Millions To Make Sure Everyone Is Insured - Politics
April 5th 2006
|
 |
|
Quest for Nanny
State |
|
The Massachusetts legislature is looking at a bill that would require
universal health insurance. According to William C. Symonds of Business
week the plan “marries conservative and liberal ideas.” According to
Symonds, every state resident will be required to have health
insurance. The bill will include an individual mandate.
Amazingly, Republican Governor Mitt Romney calls this a conservative
victory. Romney considers himself a moderate republican and is expected
to run for President in 2008. I have to ask, “What has happened to the
Republican Party?” Sure, republicans tout individual responsibility,
but this is not the same thing. This is government force. This is a
case where one bad law leads to more bad laws. What bad law is that,
you ask? The law that puts the burden on the taxpayer for medical
payments. Hospitals should be allowed to turn people away for whatever
reason they wish.
Why is this a bad idea? Because it involves the government more in
health care, not less. But this has been the pattern of the Republican
Party lately. They favor a nanny state to help protect and take care of
people. They feel that they can solve problems by throwing money at
it.
The Massachusetts bill involves large subsidies to help low-income
individuals buy health insurance. It sounds like the insurance
companies had a hand in crafting this legislation. Plus, the state of
Massachusetts is trying to create a workers paradise similar to France
by forcing (again, the Republicans love to force people to do things)
employers with 11 or more workers to help pay for their health
insurance. Maybe France and Massachusetts can become trading partners?
They call this the employer mandate.
So what will be the outcome of such legislation, if it is to become law?
There is not many companies moving to France right now. I expect the
same thing to happen to Massachusetts. There will likely be a lot of
companies with just 10 people in them and unemployment will rise.
Since the government is involved, the cost of health insurance will
likely rise faster than the nation as a whole. Eventually quality will
go down and prices will go up. Think about it this way, if everyone had
to buy a newspaper every day, and the government regulated the number of
companies allowed to sell newspapers, will the paper cost more than 25
cents or less? My bet is that it will cost more.
Sometimes the American people want a nanny state to take care of them.
The Republicans are always ready to step up to the plate and use
government force to do so. Massachusetts Senate President said “The
eyes of the nation are on us.” He is right; we will all be watching to
see how their experiment in Marxism works out.
Comment on this at our Forum
By Tom Madison
Freelance Writer
Related Books
Keywords and misspellings: Masachusetts
Massichusetts Massechusetts Massichusetts Masichusets politics poletics
democrat demoncrat republican repub comentary commentary |
RSS Feed to our content
