Massachusetts health plan wrecking state budget
Business Week chronicles what happens when you enact universal health insurance but don't put in any cost controls. Not that anybody should have needed a case study. The Democrats' plan is largely modeled on the Massachusetts program, and so far it doesn't have much in the way of cost control, either.
Massachusetts, which instituted universal coverage three years ago, wants to end the practice of reimbursing for every medical procedure and doctor visit. Providers would instead get a yearly fee for each patient, thus eliminating financial incentives to overtreat.The motivation for this switch is simple desperation—and it should be a warning to Washington. When Massachusetts enacted the most comprehensive insurance-for-all bill in the U.S. in 2006, it did nothing to address rapidly rising costs. Three years later the rate of uninsured residents has dropped from 8% to 2.6%, the lowest of all 50 states. But the cost of covering an additional 428,000 residents is wreaking havoc on the state's finances.







Comments
I think that single-payer healthcare is the only solution, but it must include clear funding guidelines. Studying and replicating the European models (Switzerland, Sweden, Great Britain, as well as Japan, and Canada)would be the wisest move.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 28, 2009 4:51 PM