Massachusetts Health Insurance Bill

[Nym90]

Interesting approach. I'm kind of surprised this would pass so easily, and that the Governor is going to sign it.

I guess I'm not really seeing the point of forcing people to get health insurance if they don't want it, though.

[Nym90]

Interesting approach. I'm kind of surprised this would pass so easily, and that the Governor is going to sign it.

I guess I'm not really seeing the point of forcing people to get health insurance if they don't want it, though.

Is it really any different from being required to have auto insurance to drive?

I'd say so; the reason auto insurance is required is because you can cause great monetary damage with your automobile to others, so they need to have someone who they can get money from for compensation.

[Nym90]

This is the perfect opportunity for Romney to pander to the conservative base.  If he signs this bill, his chances of winning the Republican nomination are nill.

romney has been the one pushing this bill.

im undecided.  i have mixed feelings about this legislation.

id prefer a bill clinton 1993 type plan. 

Agreed.

[Nym90]

Interesting approach. I'm kind of surprised this would pass so easily, and that the Governor is going to sign it.

I guess I'm not really seeing the point of forcing people to get health insurance if they don't want it, though.

Is it really any different from being required to have auto insurance to drive?

I'd say so; the reason auto insurance is required is because you can cause great monetary damage with your automobile to others, so they need to have someone who they can get money from for compensation.

Eric, I think the premise is that those without health insurance who become ill end up having their health care bills, or at least part of them, picked up by the taxpayer.

Therefore, if you can afford health insurance, the thinking seems to go, you have a responsibility to buy it, because the taxpayers shouldn't have to pick up the cost of your health care.

In theory, it could bring down premiums, because many of the people who forego health insurance are young and healthy, with a low rate of claims.

I'm ambivalent about the whole thing.  It's interesting, though.  I wonder how it will address people in the 'gap' area -- not poor enough to qualify for subsidized coverage, but not well-off enough to comfortably pay for health care premiums.  I guess they'll just pay the fine of $1,000 per year, and that will, in theory, help defray their medical costs if they get sick.

On the coercion issue, the taxpayers are already being coerced into paying for medical care for people who forego insurance, and then can't cover the bills.  So the coercion thing works both ways.  Still, as I said, I'm highly ambivalent.

Thanks. I agree that makes some deal of sense then.