Skip to comments.Single-payer insurance becoming issue in state Senate race
Posted on 07/07/2014 7:51:53 PM PDT by Citizen Zed
Berwick contends the Massachusetts health care system would be better off with a single government program similar to the federal Medicare system. The program would insure all people, rather than having several private programs with high administrative costs.
Hayre said the recent U.S. Supreme Court "Hobby Lobby" decision ruling private companies do not have to offer certain types of contraception coverage in employee health care if it violates the companies' religious beliefs also helped boost consideration of a single-payer system. Hayre said he personally favors exploring the concept at the statewide level, but said the costs, potential job losses and the method of administration would have to carefully studied.
Vermont is starting such a system, and Massachusetts might be able to learn from that state's experience, he said.
Reynolds said she likes the idea of a single-payer system, but the effort would have to be led by the best person to make sure the state implements it correctly.
(Excerpt) Read more at thesunchronicle.com ...
This way we can all live in misery except the elitists pushing this garbage.
“rather than having several private programs with high administrative costs”
People need to pull up stakes and leave if this passes
Communism never worked because the right people didn't implement it.... right.
That’s where I said this was headed...another deduction...from the moment you start working until you reach Medicare age. Look for a 5% tap.
“costs, potential job losses and the method of administration” have never stopped a destructive “Progressive” government takeover yet.
BTW, Vermont is NOT starting such a system. It’s on the books as starting in some very distant year in the future, but Vermont keeps moving the goal posts because they’ve figured out it’s impossible to pay for it, even if they tax everyone at higher than 100% of income.
Like government doesn’t always have high administrative costs.
They want one ginormous plan with hugemongous administration scam.
Nobody will want a single-payer plan when it costs 25% of their income.
“Single-payer” means they won’t have a choice. Except Obama voters who won’t be paying for it
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.