CAMPAIGN 2008

The Health-Care Debate

Romney championed a universal plan as governor. Will he be judged on its success as a presidential candidate?

By Roxana Popescu | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Jan 17, 2008 | Updated: 4:56  p.m. ET Jan 17, 2008

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: PollySigh @ 01/18/2008 8:27:53 PM

    Criminalizing people who can't afford health insurance is just a sick, terrible, horrible idea. When it first popped up people said, 'it should be required just like car insurance'. NO! Everyone is NOT required to buy car insurance.. just people who own cars. Not everyone owns a car.. they can't afford one, they don't drive or they depend on public transportation. Besides, the only car insurance required is liability at a very minmal level.. it costs MUCH less than health insurance.

    I very much hope the Mass plan fails because this 'mandate' business is just a terrible idea. And kudos to barack Obama for refusing to endorse it.

    • Posted By: dodgers @ 01/27/2008 4:22:22 AM

      Obviously, You don't really know how the health system works. Working in E.Rs I have seen doctors perform different tests such as a cat scan or ultrasounds x-ray lab test depending on if you have health insurance or not. You think that you might have a law suit if your er doctor didn't total evaluate your vist. Well, you recieve after care instructions that say if you have any of these symtoms please return to th er. I have also seen 5 hospitals that have closed due to people not paying their hospital bills. Note these people in Mass are lucky I have seen my health insurance monthly bill soar to over 1000 a month.

  • Posted By: Martin000 @ 01/22/2008 10:26:05 PM

    It seems a lot of people's objections to the MA plan is it allows profit. Is that a serious point being made? Is this not America, a capitalist country? Has capitalism and profit not worked exceeding well for our society compared to other economic systems? It has worked incredibly well not just for TVs, stereos, washers, carpet, and other things that people don't absolutely need to live, but it also has worked for things that people do need to live like food, clothing, and shelter.

    "It really is quite obvious that the free market system has failed with healthcare."

    America doesn't have a free market healthcare system. It has a screwed up mixture of private business and government laws and regulations.

  • Posted By: Martin000 @ 01/22/2008 10:24:50 PM

    It seems a lot of people objections to the MA plan is it allows profit. Is that a serious point being made? Is this not America, a capitalist country. Has capitalism and profit not worked exceeding well for our society compared to other economic society. It has worked incredibly not just for TVs, stereos, washers, carpet, and other things that people don't absolutely need to live, but it also has worked for things that people do need to live like food, clothing, and shelter.

    "It really is quite obvious that the free market system has failed with healthcare."

    America doesn't have a free market healthcare system. It has a screwed up mixture of private business and government laws and regulations.

  • Posted By: alabama1 @ 01/20/2008 4:51:09 AM

    About all I can say for Romney's plan is that at least they tried! And that is something.
    It really is quite obvious that the free market system has failed with healthcare. We have to take out the profit making and plow that back into actuall care.
    Why would any reasonable person think that reimbursing insurance companies makes sense!
    Enough of this people. Do something!

  • Posted By: g_love180 @ 01/19/2008 3:37:05 PM

    Newsweek hates Mitt Romney

  • Posted By: jamjenmad @ 01/18/2008 1:02:40 PM

    The American people want EVERYONE to have health care. Maybe it's just the bleeding hearts, but this plan is BETTER than a democrat led UNIVERSAL healthcare system like Canada's that would RUIN America. It's making people stand up for their own lives, it saves TAXPAYERS millions if people have insurance and go to the Dr. and don't drain the system from having a hand out and/or waiting until illnesses are more progressive and harder/more expensive to treat. The best part of Romney's strategy is to leave healthcare mandates up to individual states because he recognizes the extreme difference among states' demographics, economics. If people don't like this plan, let's have Hillary care where the quality and wait time will become horrendous and we will lose the best health care system in the world AND teach our kids/citizens to be entitlement minded, and not self-sufficient. That mentality is a HUGE threat to weakening our American society. While we sit around and moan, other countries citizen's are coming into our country getting the best education, taking over in technology and jobs and we are getting lazier and lazier. The Healthcare forum is evidence of what American's want. I say let them have it, but let them choose and let them take responsibility for themselves!

    • Posted By: health_care_advocate @ 01/19/2008 8:11:16 AM

      "It's making people stand up for their own lives, it saves TAXPAYERS millions if people have insurance and go to the Dr. and don't drain the system from having a hand out and/or waiting until illnesses are more progressive and harder/more expensive to treat."

      Dear jamjenmad - You'd better check the facts. The Romney mandate has added 126,810 FULLY substidized (free) and 24,531 very heavily subsidized (almost free) enrollees, not to mention the 91,000 Medicaid enrollees since May 2006. That IS taxpayer money.

      You also need to know that in order to get state subsitdized insurance or Medicaid, individuals over the age of 55 must agree to an "estate recovery" program, where the state gets to be first in line if the person dies. This also applys to anyone who becomes 55 while the policy is in force. This is true for both the fully subsitdized and those who pay hundreds of dollars per month.

      Even the new free products are run through profit-driven insurance companies. This means that citizens' money is being directly funneled into this multi-billion dollar commercial industry. The overhead in these plans is outrageous. Tax money is diverted from people to corporations. "Thar's gold in them thar hills!", be it federal gold, state gold or gold right out of your pocket, it's still citizens' money. Much of this public money isn't going to health care. Even the state pockets a 4.5% premium on all non-free plans. A 10% to 14% increase in costs is envisioned for the coming year.

      The Mandate will be enforced through the Department of Revenue (state tax department) and inability to pay will be treated the same as tax non-payment (evasion) and subject to the usual collection methods, including interest, wage garnishment and property liens. It is uncertain if imprisonment is an optional punishment.

      The law has established a massive new bureaucracy by creating at least 20 new agencies. These agencies have vast data gathering and sharing capabilities. This comes at an immense cost to us all.

      No matter what your political persuasion, citizens must scratch beyond the surface of the PR releases and the rhetoric to find the truth of this harmful and deceitful law. Yes, the nation needs a sound, well planned health care strategy, and this is not it.

  • Posted By: noni @ 01/19/2008 4:45:27 AM

    I am uninsured in Massachusetts and cannot afford the insurance nor the fines.This system is so screwed up.First you have people paying nothing,people paying$1000.00 or more a month and if your in the middle income like myself and can't afford it they fine us.What kind of mean mandate like this is fair?The State House has no idea what's happening to it's citizens and the hardship on middle class and small business.This is the worst law that has happened to me in my life time.The poor get free care the wealthy get the best care the middle get no care!

  • Posted By: rottimom @ 01/18/2008 9:52:08 PM

    I am a RN in the community and work with poor to low income and I have seen a positive impact on healthcare in Massachusetts.
    Before the Romney Health Plan, I saw people using the ER for minor illness, no follow through after those visits and not buying prescriptions. Some people had a negative attitude about using the ER, who cared, they didn't have to pay a dime and got medication they needed..at a cost to the hospital. The hospital ER's were running in the red because of the uninsured. Many illnesses developed into something more serious because they didn't follow up their care or fill prescriptions.
    Romney's plan made people responsible for their healthcare. When those who had a negative attitude were faced with losing their tax return or paying a small fine, the attitudes changed. Health Centers opened up in neighborhoods that assisted the uninsured complete applications for health insurance, as well as food
    stamps and other benefits.
    The healthcare system has now changed to a health promotion and wellness model. It is working. ER visits for nonessential care is down; people have a family doctor who they see for regular visits; followup care is moving followed; prescriptions are filled.
    The cost? I haven't heard anyone complain, other than those who have been used to the cost coming off someone elses back. Most people have no cost or very low premiums. The working people say there premium is not expensive and now they can manage their healthcare in a positive direction.
    It will be interesting to see the impact on hospital losses because of the uninsured. Is everything perfect, no..but I must say, we certainly have a healthier outlook in the stae...people are RESPONSIBLE for their care. What a difference empowerment makes!

  • Posted By: AnnMaloneRN @ 01/18/2008 5:27:41 PM

    I am a nurse and a taxpayer in Massachusetts who believes that this Romney-Insurance Industry plan is a sham approach to "universal healthcare". I and most Americans want to be part of creating a program that will achieve affordable quality universal healthcare but the current MA PLan is NOT the answer The mandate to purchase private insraunce lacks responsible financing or and cost controls. Hello??? How does anyone think this MA plan is sustainable?!! We cannot afford this wasteful approach that adds more bureaucracy and puts profits over people's health.




    now being forced to purchase expensive insurance products with huge deductables an co-pays, to line the coffers of the profit-driven insurance industry

  • Posted By: rolandhosch @ 01/18/2008 2:11:47 PM

    Every state has universal health care right now!!! Unfortunately it is run through our emergency rooms where it is extra-ordinarily expensive to treat sore throats and the like. It is ruining our hospitals and jeopardizing our over-all care. Your review never accounted for how expensive it is NOT to have insurance!! Mitt's plan is awesome!! There may be someways to tweak it in other states, but if you think California is not spending MORE on the uninsured than they would if they had some form of insurance - you are an idiot. The white elephant in the room is illegal immigration and the Federal government mandating emergency rooms to treat anyone who comes in. That is what makes Mitt's and Ma's plan so genius!!!

  • Posted By: jimrnemeth @ 01/18/2008 2:04:50 PM

    I'm glad you're speaking for all Americans, Jam.

    I actually agree with you in one respect, though, American people DO want everyone to have health care. But...see below. This is how I'd want the issue put to the American people:

    Q: Do you want health insurance?
    American People: YES!!!

    Q: Do you want your government to pass a law that forces YOU pay the entire cost of insurance yourself, the cost of which will run up to HUNDREDS of dollars MONTHLY?
    American People: Um...no.

    A universal plan would RUIN America? That's funny. The cost of the Iraq war is approaching a TRILLION dollars, but you'd begrudge much less than that to allow everyone in America to have health insurance.

  • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 01/18/2008 12:39:09 PM

    t is good to finally see Mitt in his true character. A REPULICAN wo woud mandae a law requirin all citizens to buy coverage that they may not be able to afford. Sounds socialist to me. Same guy said he was to the left of Ted Kennedy on gay rights. Bishop Romney is just like his cult, say whatever thy want to hear. Facts don't really matter, power does A mormon Pres.? NOT!!!

  • Posted By: Gene DW @ 01/18/2008 10:31:41 AM

    After many years in politics that comments are generally made by those who oppose the issue. Rarely do those who support an issue bother taking the time to comment. The nature of politics require an individual to take credit for something that many are involved in. Mitt Romney has a proven track record of innovation and bringing people together. A great quality for someone to lead this country.

    • Posted By: jimrnemeth @ 01/18/2008 11:53:43 AM

      Innovation and bringing people together? Passing a law requiring people to burden the cost themselves for insurance when they might not be able to afford it, is innovative? And then penalize them financially for every month that they can't afford to be covered? That's innovative? You can keep your idea of innovative.

      Tell you what. How about you or anyone else who is praising Romney for his health care "solution" pay my nearly $600 a MONTH (monthly, mind you - not bi-monthly, not quarterly, but MONTHLY) health insurance bill and then I'll stop complaining and being, as you point out, discontent.

      Deal? No, I didn't think so.

      J

  • Posted By: Gene DW @ 01/18/2008 10:26:51 AM

    After seceral years in politics myself I have learned that, generally, the only people who comment or respond are the discontent. No one person can take credit for success or failure, but there is always a leader. Mitt Romney is a true innovator and leader.

  • Posted By: pasteeater @ 01/18/2008 9:36:27 AM

    It will get more scrutiny, but thats a good thing. We need to know how much of a profit. the insurance companies are making. I would not expect them to come out on their own and say they are making windfall profits. Also it looks like the ones that are hurt by this is the middle class. They are the ones who could end up losing everything because of medical bills. Does this plan do anything to control the runaway cost of care in the U.S. Of course it looks like a small step in the right direction but there is a long way to go.

  • Posted By: jimrnemeth @ 01/18/2008 9:05:51 AM

    WHY is Romney and his supporters touting his "solution" to health care. The "solution" is this: a law was passed in MA FORCING individuals to buy and pay for their own health insurance. The law additionally states that financial penalties will be given to those who don't...or can't afford the insurance. So what we have now is the state saying: "Ok, we are FORCING you to pay hundreds of dollars per MONTH for health insurance - and if you're above a certain income bracket, well, tough luck if you can't afford it.

    So now, many MA residents who are already having problems making ends meet financially now have an additional option to choose from every month: put food on table, keep my house from being foreclosed, or make the monthy payment for health insurance that MA passed a law FORCING us to have.

    Now, when Romney left his term as Governor, if he had left the state with a huge budget surplus (he didn't) and this money went toward helping people pay for health insurance...now that would be something to be proud of. But passing a law FORCING people to buy/pay for health insurance that many can ill afford on top of a number of other pressing financial concerns (food, mortgage, etc.)...THIS is what Romney is proud of?

    Why can't the press see this "solution" for what it is????

    J

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse