Replies

As usual, statistics can be spun to say anything you want them to say. I read the entire article but could not find anything to clarify the issue.

Bottom line: The statement is “Massachusetts still has the highest health-insurance costs in the nation, averaging $13,788 for a family”

The question is with the word “still”. I think that means before romneycare, MA had the highest per family cost in the nation and after romneycare, MA STILL had the highest cost.

Further, health costs have risen nationwide in every state.

So romneycare could have lowered costs in MA but not by enough to move MA from 50th to 49th most expensive. And romneycare could have lowered costs so that the increase in MA is less than the increases in other states, but not by enough to move MA from 50th to 49th.

I did read the article and could find no clarifying statements one way or another.

Romney Care will not lower costs anymore than placing high taxes on everything medical would lower the costs.

Romneycare is a loser, end of story.

Whatever it may or may not have done to MA citizen in regards to health care costs, it none the less has cost them more than it should.

And that is above and beyond simply dismissing it as a government run program which should be enough for any conservative.

Some light reading:

http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/02/04/the-romneycare-crackup-continues-and-is-becoming-a-chasm/

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/16/health/policy/16mass.html

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18322

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/01/11/catching-flak-for-romneycare/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121728669884991317.html

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19329

http://www.statehousecall.org/romneycare-one-year-on

http://www.boston.com/news/health/blog/2008/07/ronneycare_for.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574447181764002214.html