RomneyCare: basically worked? - New England Patriots Forums

The Brandon Five · 07-20-2011, 12:16 PM

‘RomneyCare’ — a revolution that basically worked - The Boston Globe

Quote:

A detailed Globe examination of voluminous health care and financial data, and interviews with key figures in every sector of the health care system, makes it clear that while there have been some stumbles — and some elements of the effort merit a grade of “incomplete’’ — the overhaul has, after five years, worked as well as or better than expected:

■ The percentage of residents without insurance coverage is down dramatically, to less than 2 percent; for children, the figure is a tiny fraction of 1 percent, a state survey shows. These are by far the lowest rates in the nation.

■ Many more businesses are offering insurance to employees than were before the law. The fear going in was that the opposite would happen.

■ The cost of the changes, while large, has proved manageable thus far, though there are some serious warning signs on the horizon, especially as federal stimulus funds, which have helped defray the cost, run out.

■ The plan remains exceptionally popular among state residents — indeed its popularity has only grown with time. There are some unhappy sectors — notably small business owners, who had hoped to see moderating premiums and chafe, in some cases, at the heavy-handed enforcement of the rules by the state. And support for the requirement that individuals obtain insurance is down to a slender majority, a recent poll shows. But there is no significant constituency here for repeal.

■ And while health care costs continue to grow at alarming rates, as they have nationally, the consensus of industry leaders and health care economists is that this trend cannot be fairly traced to the makeover but rather to cost pressures baked into the existing health care payment system. Massachusetts does have the highest health care costs in the nation, but it owned this dubious distinction long before “RomneyCare’’ was born.

Taken in sum, it is a far cry from what critics of Romney, and of Obama, are saying about the Massachusetts plan. The attacks often rely on distortions, omissions or flagrant inaccuracies, and typically ignore the fact that the law accomplished its principal goal — expanding coverage to nearly every citizen.

Interesting points. I was hopeful that the idea would work and have been disappointed with costs continuing to spiral. For those in MA, what say ye?

Gainzo · 07-20-2011, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

Interesting points. I was hopeful that the idea would work and have been disappointed with costs continuing to spiral. For those in MA, what say ye?

From 1994 to 1998 I worked at a Company that grew from 10 employees to nearly 70. The Company picked up 80% of the health care premiums. The Company crashed and burned but their demise had nothing to do with health care costs.

I worked for a Fortune 500 Company after that and they picked up 70%. In 2001 I moved to a Company with 5 employees. The Company was part of a Small Business Coalition that pooled together to get the best deal.

I'm not kidding when I say that every year since 2002 the Company has switched Insurance (Harvard Pilgrim, Blue Cross, Tufts, back to Harvard, back to Tufts) in order to keep costs down but my contribution has risen.

The only negative I have heard about MassHealth is people moaning that they can't afford the coverage even though they have jobs. There was one guy I read about that was ticked. He said, "How can I make the lease payments on my new truck and afford to pay for health insurance I don't want?"

As the article stated, Health Care costs were spiraling out of control way before 2008.

PatriotsReign · 07-20-2011, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gainzo

From 1994 to 1998 I worked at a Company that grew from 10 employees to nearly 70. The Company picked up 80% of the health care premiums. The Company crashed and burned but their demise had nothing to do with health care costs.

I worked for a Fortune 500 Company after that and they picked up 70%. In 2001 I moved to a Company with 5 employees. The Company was part of a Small Business Coalition that pooled together to get the best deal.

I'm not kidding when I say that every year since 2002 the Company has switched Insurance (Harvard Pilgrim, Blue Cross, Tufts, back to Harvard, back to Tufts) in order to keep costs down but my contribution has risen.

The only negative I have heard about MassHealth is people moaning that they can't afford the coverage even though they have jobs. There was one guy I read about that was ticked. He said, "How can I make the lease payments on my new truck and afford to pay for health insurance I don't want?"

As the article stated, Health Care costs were spiraling out of control way before 2008.

I've had Blue Cross for 8 years and my costs have remained the same since year 1...I pay $23/month for great health care with no co-payments as long as I stay in network.

So I assume my company is covering the increased costs. Next, our fed gov't will want me to actually pay taxes on my HC....

Gainzo · 07-20-2011, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatriotsReign

I've had Blue Cross for 8 years and my costs have remained the same since year 1...I pay $23/month for great health care with no co-payments as long as I stay in network.

So I assume my company is covering the increased costs. Next, our fed gov't will want me to actually pay taxes on my HC....

Does your Company have any job openings? That is an awesome health care plan you have.

The Brandon Five · 07-20-2011, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gainzo

Does your Company have any job openings? That is an awesome health care plan you have.

Word. Sign me up.

Gainzo · 07-20-2011, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

Word. Sign me up.

$23 a month with no co-pays? Union members pay more than that!

Real World · 07-20-2011, 03:46 PM

Hey, spiraling out of control, unsustainable costs aside, the plan worked great.

Gainzo · 07-20-2011, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

Hey, spiraling out of control, unsustainable costs aside, the plan worked great.

Health care costs were spiraling out of control way before "RomneyCare."

khayos · 07-20-2011, 04:01 PM

If you look at the state budget, the full implementation of Romneycare has increased the Massachusetts budget by 5-6 billion (you can see the growth in Medicaid from 2004 on). So, all else being equal, Romneycare cost 20% of the state budget and that's just to get us down to about 3% uninsured. Meanwhile, insurance plan costs continue to go up.

Gainzo · 07-20-2011, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khayos

If you look at the state budget, the full implementation of Romneycare has increased the Massachusetts budget by 5-6 billion (you can see the growth in Medicaid from 2004 on). So, all else being equal, Romneycare cost 20% of the state budget and that's just to get us down to about 3% uninsured. Meanwhile, insurance plan costs continue to go up.

Do you live in Massachusetts?