It is difficult to believe that even with the full support of the White House, the senior leadership of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, and legislative majorities in both chambers, the Democratic health care proposal still may fail. This monstrosity of a bill has become so unpopular that Democrats may seek to pass it through a process whereby they will not vote directly on the bill but "deem" it to have passed through a different bill. Such chicanery is not only a breathtaking display of disregard for the intelligence of the American people, but is of highly dubious constitutionality.
But if the Democrats succeed in their government takeover of the health care system, what can we expect? It is difficult to predict with precision because of the complete lack of transparency promised by President Obama and Nancy Pelosi. No one knows what will end up in the final bill. The best way to get a preview of the things to come, therefore, is to look to the experience of our neighbors in Massachusetts. Gov. Duval has, after all, recently stated that the “…United States Congress has looked to the Massachusetts experience in crafting federal reforms and the legislation passed by each house of Congress bears a striking resemblance to the Massachusetts model."
When that state passed its health care "reform" bill in 2006, the promise was that it would be a panacea for all the problems facing Massachussetts health care providers and recipients. Under the Massachusetts plan, everyone must purchase health care insurance or be fined almost $1,200. The state government would supposedly redirect federal and state funds from supporting the uninsured to subsidizing insurance policies for the poor. The state government would also provide funding for preventative care, which theoretically would save money in the long run.
Sadly, none of this happened. Over the first few years 55,000 people signed up for Medicaid and the new free insurance program was swamped with new enrollments, while very few citizens bought private insurance policies. And although the total number of uninsured residents of Massachussetts dropped by 70% – the savings that were promised have never materialized. In the first two years rates went up 50%. Now in the third year their citizens are being hit with another 24% increase.
As a result, Massachusetts is now running a massive deficit in its health care budget. Last year, the state had to go hat in hand to Washington for a bailout and received $1 billion to cover the anticipated gap over the next three years. This was still not enough and the Massachusetts bureaucrats are now back down in Washington with hats in hand looking for $475 million in additional funds.
As if this was not enough, the State House is now also urging that the state’s doctors accept flat rates for patient care as opposed to fees for services. Otherwise stated, they are proposing that the entire system be converted into something that resembles a state owned HMO. To cap it all off, they are asking the Federal government for an additional $135 million to help facilitate the transition.
The Massachusetts model is now bleeding that state dry. Were it not for federal government bailouts, the state’s finances would be in chaos. The question the American people should be asking President Obama and Congressional leadership is "who is going to bail out the U.S. Government should Washington follow Massachusetts’ lead in health care "reform?"
America desperately needs health care reform. But Washington should follow the medical community in the excellent tradition of the Hippocratic Oath: “First do no harm.” This bill violates that test and therefore should be rejected so we can get back to focusing on the real needs of health care reform and cutting the wasteful costs in the system.