BOSTON – Massachusetts’ universal healthcare law celebrated its first anniversary in April. And depending on who you talk to, it’s either in need of refinement or an overhaul.
The National Center for Policy Analysis released a report in April that warned that regulations and mandates are driving up the cost of the commonwealth’s universal health insurance coverage.
NCPA outlined five steps the commonwealth needs to undertake to promote insurance coverage for all its residents.
“Many of the ideas – getting rid of mandated benefits and eliminating the employer pay-or-play – were supported by then-Governor (Mitt) Romney,” said Devon Herrick, senior fellow at NCPA. “But the Legislature would not go along.”
Governor Deval Patrick, State Senate President Therese Murray and Speaker of the House Salvatore DiMasi did not respond to requests for comments, although Murray has told reporters that several proposals are being developed in the Senate.
“Being uninsured has to do with a lack of affordable coverage,” Herrick said. “Massachusetts has a low rate of uninsured, but health plans aren’t affordable because of insurance regulations and mandated benefits.”
“We’re all on the same page,” said Sally Pipes, president and CEO of the Pacific Research Institute, regarding criticism of the Massachusetts plan.
In addition to removing mandates and regulations, Pipes said Massachusetts needs to remove the tax advantage for employers and give it to individuals; enable individuals to buy health insurance across state lines; and establish a pool for the working poor to buy health insurance.
She also advocates increasing the ratio of doctors to nurses to encourage the creation of inexpensive walk-in health clinics and decreasing the number of cases where care is delivered in hospitals’ costly emergency departments.
Other states looking to provide universal health insurance coverage need to pay attention to flaws that are inherent across the board, Herrick said.
Pipes agreed, saying it is important to make sure all players are aware of the consequences of poorly designed approaches. Instead of addressing the real problems of Massachusetts’ current plan, she said, the legislators “are adding more cost and government design, resulting in larger tax increases.”
Expect healthcare cost to be either the No. 1 or No. 2 domestic issue in the 2008 presidential campaign, promised Pipes.