The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Mitt Romney's Health Care Disaster: What Not to Do

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Mitt Romney's Health Care Disaster: What Not to Do

By Doug Bandow on 10.1.09 @ 9:48AM

Mitt Romney's health care debacle in Massachusetts lives on--unfortunately. Observes Paul Hsieh in the Christian Science Monitor:

The Massachusetts plan thus violates the individual's right to spend his own money according to his best judgment for his own benefit. Instead, individuals are forced to choose from a limited set of insurance plans on terms set by lobbyists and bureaucrats, rather than those based on a rational assessment of individual needs.

Because the state-mandated health insurance is so expensive, the government must also subsidize the costs for lower-income residents. In response, the state government has cut payments to doctors and hospitals. With such poor reimbursements, physicians are increasingly reluctant to take on new patients.

Some patients in western Massachusetts must wait more than a year for a routine physical exam. Waiting times for specialists in Boston are longer than in comparable cities in other states and have gotten worse. Some desperate patients have even resorted to "group appointments" where the doctor sees several patients at once (without the privacy necessary to allow the physician to remove the patient's clothing and perform a proper physical exam). These patients all have "coverage," but that's not the same as actual medical care.

The Massachusetts plan is also breaking the state budget. Since 2006, health insurance costs in Massachusetts have risen nearly twice as fast as the national average. The state expects to spend $595 million more in 2009 on its health insurance program than it did in 2006, a 42 percent increase. Those higher health costs help explain why the state faced a $5 billion budget gap this summer. To help close it, lawmakers raised taxes sharply.

The failure of the Romney plan most obviously demonstrates what Congress should not do. Alas, Sen. Max Baucus's so-called centrist alternative would end up almost as ruinous as a more formal government take-over of health care.

But the mess left by the former governor, and his continuing defense of his handiwork, also raises questions about Romney's presumed presidential bid in 2012. If this is his vision of success, just what would President Mitt Romney do once the votes were counted and he was in office?

View all comments (11) | Leave a comment

Ken (Old Texican)| 10.1.09 @ 10:38AM

Mitt burned his last bridge with that mess.
He is toast now. Think how bad his State will look by 2012.

Becky| 10.1.09 @ 11:15AM

Time to review Michael Crighton's complexity theory talk, with emphasis on finding people with enough integrity to acknowledge what hasn't or isn't working in politics, in order to change course.

Of course, the president gives lip service to responsiblity, and identifying what works, blah, blah, blah, but it is really all just hot air.

Because government spends other people's money, they don't have to get smart fast, like the private sector spending its own does

Romney disappointed me at the time it was enacted and lost my vote at that time.

Why can't a politician say he was wrong or made a mistake, but instead keeps talking to try to manipulate the record?

S.L. Toddard| 10.1.09 @ 11:33AM

I have said this before, but it bears repeating: I would never call Mitt Romney a "conservative", but his argument is very - even nobly - conservative in one fundamental respect: The healthcare reforms he proposed and eventually passed *were pursued in the proper venue*, at the state level, as per the U.S. Constitution and its 10th Amendment. The federal government is not empowered to create a healthcare system - period. If the GOP had stuck to their guns and never sacrificed fealty to the Constitution for expediency then a Constitutional, 10th Amendment argument *now* might result in more than a nationwide laughing fit. If Romneycare recieved no federal assistance - and it shouldn't - then whether Romneycare works or not should be of no concern to anyone here who doesn't live in Massachusetts (as I do). And if Romneycare works, that is a *boon* to Conservative aims, as conservatives can argue that there is no need for a federal healthcare program, since Massachusetts has demonstrated that state governments are fully qualified to perform that function, should their citizenry, through their elected representatives, choose to do so. It is not anyone in the North East's right to say what sort of healthcare a citizen of North Carolina should - or *will* - have. And the reverse is true. Conservatives should fight this from a principled states-rights perspective - what do you red-staters care about whether Massachusetts has state-run healthcare? That's my business - not yours. And no one from my state should have the right to dictate to anyone from *your* states what sort of healthcare *they* have. The people from each state should have - and *do* have, according to the 10th Amendment - the right to choose for themselves, in their own state legislatures, how they wish this issue handled for them, until the Constitution is amended. And wouldn't you rather a country where Massachusetts is free to have state-run health-care while Montana and Georgia and every other state decide for themselves? Then why not make that argument? Just because it's good for Massachusetts does *not* mean it's good for Alabama. Bay Staters are *not* the same as Alabamans - ask any Alabaman. And if the good people of Alabama decide, in part, that they want "universal healthcare" in their state then they can hash it out amongst their local and state representatives, as the Constitution delegates.

It's the principle of self government, and of United, sovereign, free and independent states. The main reason the GOP cannot make this argument is: credibility. They have none on the state sovereignty and 10th Amendment issues. That's why new - truly conservative - blood is needed. If those on the Right truly want Conservative government then when candidates like Rand Paul run for election they should come out in droves and support him with zeal. New truly conservative voices, untainted by the party machine and brand, need to come in, correct course and resurrect that brand - and they need support from truly Conservative voters, who need to forgive Rand Paul and others on the right who were right about Iraq.

2Anglico| 10.1.09 @ 12:03PM

Iraq, Iran, Afganistan...Iraq, Iran, Afganistan...mmm, mmm, mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mmm, mmm, mmm
Sing it together now!!

Grzmlyk| 10.1.09 @ 2:11PM

It's a start? That's like saying I wanted to fix a flat tire on my car, so I crashed it into a brick wall at 80 mph.

It wasn't a perfect fix, but it's a start.

Mitt Romney is a feckless, go-along-to-get-along milquetoast. Anyone who throws, what, $20 million of his own money into getting the nomination and loses to John McCain - JOHN McCAIN!!!! - the weakest candidate the Republicans have seated in modern history (including Bob Dole in '96) had better not have the temerity to mount a second disastrous bid for the nomination. Sorry. Romney's moment has passed. The man is a manager - not a leader.

Whenever you get government involved in health care, it is ONLY going to screw it up, regardless of whether it's state or the Feds. That's why it's hopelessly screwed up NOW.

This entire canard of "health care reform" that Obama and the Democrat Congress are trying to ram down our throats ain't even about health care. It's about control. It's about staying in power. Why do you think they're in such a hurry to pass it now, but it doesn't take effect until after the 2012 election? Because they know that even the Liberal Readers among us will eventually figure out that it is the road to serfdom.

When are people going to learn that the felons inside the beltway don't give a damn about those of us outside the beltway beyond our wallets and our votes? They will gleefully bulldoze every last institution in this country in order to stay in power for one more election cycle.

I know, I know, liberals: THIS time it'll be different. All we have to do is click our heels three times and wish upon a star, and universal health care will increase coverage and lower costs, unicorns will dance, rainbows will fill the sky and the left and right will join together in bipartisan goodwill.

While he's at it, why doesn't Obama just go ahead and repeal the law of gravity? Alter the speed of light? Empower the Cubs to win a World Series?

InRussetShadows| 10.1.09 @ 2:13PM

Romney is all sizzle, but no steak. Having the government -- at any level -- control my health care is tyranny.

Curtis Rasmussen| 10.1.09 @ 3:26PM

At least you could leave the state to escape. On a national level there is nowhere to run.

Daisy| 10.1.09 @ 6:01PM

I don't trust Romney because he's a RINO. He wouldn't stand a chance against Obama in 2012.

sea vegg| 10.1.09 @ 10:35PM

This informative post has the potent to give precise info about the dietary supplements that have positive effect on our health. sea vegg is another product that is prepared from nutrients of see weeds and extremely useful for our body’s natural mechanism.

links of london Rings| 10.21.09 @ 1:31AM

It was a very nice idea! Just wanna say thank you for the information you have shared. Just continue writing this kind of post. I will be your loyal reader. Thanks again.

koko| 1.12.10 @ 8:04AM

Thank you sharing, I like your blog, I wish your blog get better and better! Into the new year, all star shoesif you have a need to also welcome you to restaurant, then take a looknike outlet! Happy new year!