We Stand FIRM
FIRM Home
Blog Home
Recent Comments
RSS Feed
Twitter: WeStandFIRM

Contributors
Lin Zinser
Ari Armstrong
Diana Hsieh
Paul Hsieh
E-mail all the bloggers

Blogroll
Principles in Practice
Capitalism Magazine
Patient Power
Medpolitics
Concierge Medicine MD
ReasonPharm
Health Care BS
Free Market Cure
KevinMD
John Goodman
Junkfood Science
Covert Rationing
NCPA Digest
Socialized Medicine
State House Call
Big Gov Health
WSJ Health Blog
Medical Progress Today
Derek Lowe
AFCM
Free Colorado
WASH
Heal Spiel
Health Policy Action Center
Lucidicus Project

Articles/Essays
"Health Care Is Not A Right"
"Moral Health Care vs. 'Universal Health Care'"
"Mandatory Health Insurance: Wrong For America"
"Universal Healthcare and the Waistline Police"
"The Right Vision of Health Care"
"FAQ on Free Market Health Insurance"

FIRM Debates Universal Healthcare on Opposing Views


Archives
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
 Saturday, April 14, 2007
More Problems With Massachusetts
By Paul Hsieh, MD @ 9:39 AM PermaLink

This recent article in the Boston Globe reveals yet more problems with Massachusetts' attempt to guarantee universal health care:
"Health plan may exempt 20% of the uninsured"

By Alice Dembner, Globe Staff -- April 12, 2007

To remove the threat of a public backlash, the state plans to exempt nearly 20 percent of uninsured adults from the state's new requirement that everyone have health insurance.

The proposal, expected to be approved by a state board today, is based on calculations that even the lowest-cost insurance would not be affordable for an estimated 60,000 people with low and moderate incomes who do not qualify for state subsidies. Forcing them to buy insurance or pay a penalty could jeopardize the rest of the state's initiative, officials said...
Because these sorts of government-mandated health plans are detached from the usual market mechanisms, the state is forced to either compromise on "universal" coverage, decrease (i.e., ration) benefits, or raise taxes. In this case, the government is choosing the first "solution" in order not to undermine the political popularity of their program.

Unfortunately, none of the officials seem willing to entertain market-based solutions, such as HSA's (Health Savings Accounts) coupled with free-market catastrophic insurance, a system that has been proven to provide better quality coverage for a lower cost.

Labels: ,

E-mail Paul Hsieh, MD / PermaLink / Comments / Trackbacks / BlogThis