Massachusetts is “experimenting” with mandatory health insurance, according to the Dr. Judy Ann Bigby, the commonwealth’s secretary of Health and Human Services. Under a new law that went into effect July 1, Massachusetts citizens are required to obtain health insurance or face a penalty. NPR has an interview with Dr. Bigby where she explains the experimental nature of the project and its stated goals.
Especially amusing is the part where she’s asked to explain the fact that the fines employers face for not offering health care to their workers are so low as to be pointless, while the fines employees face for not obtaining health care are..well, harder to ignore.
Hey, nothing is perfect, especially not government work, right?
What do you guys think of Mass’s experiment?
Massachusetts Makes Health Insurance Mandatory [NPR]
(Photo: Bree Bailey)
More From Consumerist
-
Student With Diabetes Forced To Decide Between Health Care Or Going To College
-
State Insurance Regulators Don't Always Have Authority To Regulate Insurance Rates
-
Sometimes It's Cheaper To Pay Cash Than Use Your Insurance
-
Sears & Olive Garden To Give Workers Money To Go Choose Their Own Health Insurance
-
MetLife Caught Penalizing Drivers Who Weren’t At Fault In Accidents
I’m from Mass and I’m currently uninsured. This law puts me in a tough position because I now have to figure out a way to add $300 a month to my budget. I’m one of those people who makes “too much” to be eligible for any kind of goverment benefit that might give me free or discounted health insurance, but I hardly make enough money to afford the $280 a month plan that my employer offers. Sometimes it feels like it would be easier to just quit my job and go on welfare.
DR_AWESOME writes “Sometimes it feels like it would be easier to just quit my job and go on welfare.”
Ooh, you are so close to figuring out the Commonwealth of Taxachusetts master plan!
@ KSE:
You say that the free market is the answer. but I say its not. While I’m all for the free market in a lot of cases, healthcare, like education, is a place where I am not.
If you look at the current state of things in a semi-regulated state, you’ll see that healthcare has been set up in a way to line the pockets of insurance companies & Drug manufacturers. This is allowed to continue because those that would change it are given money from these very companies.
As it stands there is a substantial amount of regulation in what lobbyists can give to politicians, if that is opened to the free market, the government will be controlled by the highest bidders.
Let the free market regulate the price of cheeseburgers and gas, but keep the health and education of the people in this country out of this.
if anything there should be far more governmental control over helathcare…
   @ Dr_awesome: See, that’s what I’m talking about. $280 a month. Now, in my opinion, that’s a lot less than what you’d pay for a simple major medical plan these days.
    On the other hand, I work for [I think] a large, generous company, who’s negotiated deals, and I pay $50 a week for a “family plan.” This covers four of us. And it’s got the $25 doctor co-pay. $100 emergency room co-pay. $200 deductible on medical per person per year. Maximum out-of-pocket of $5000 per person per year. There’s dental coverage, and vision coverage. They are great about paying, too, UNLESS you don’t follow procedure. If you can’t follow directions, you are screwed.
    There ARE preferred providers that you have to visit, though, to get full benefits. And, you can tell when you visit those providers. They’re likely getting a lump sum for each patient that goes through their system, and nothing more. They’re getting a hundred bucks or two from your insurance when you visit, and nothing more. Regardless of how much treatment and time you need from the doctor. They have little incentive to actually figure out what’s wrong with you. Their best bet, financially, is to get you out the door as quickly as possible, and prescribe some expensive prescription. If you’re REALLY sick, they will kick you up to a specialist as fast as possible! And the few “preferred” specialists in your problem area are swamped…
    Affordable insurance is not necessarily a panacea, that’s for sure! I would think that a non-insured, money-is-no-object rich person who is willing and able to pay, is who gets the best health care under the US system.
@KSE: Yes, I’m quite well aware of the fact that everything government does is paid for by taxes. My point here is that in this case, Mass. is saying “Well, since we already tax the crap out of you (MA residents), so let’s not call it a tax..we’ll just pass a law requiring you to buy something but force you to pay for it. Hmm..that sounds like a tax! But we won’t call it a tax.
We already pay enough fucking taxes, don’t you think maybe basic healthcare should be included in that? There’s a reason they call it Taxachusetts, and I think the people of MA would agree that they’re already paying enough taxes already without having “mandatory health insurance” fees forced on them at gunpoint.
I might add that it’s pretty hard for citizens to pay taxes or contribute anything to the “free market” if they’re dead, so it must might be in the government’s best interest to keep its worker-bees from getting sick.
(And by the way, I’m sure the Commonwealth of Taxachusetts is at the very moment trying to figure out how to tax blog entries that mention the word “Massachusetts”).
The free market is great for some things, but not for anything that’s necessary for life.
@alicetheowl: Well, $375K might get you a fixer-upper in Roxbury…maybe.
Aren’t there any big lawsuits over this yet? If there’s anyone more powerful than the insurance and drug companies, it’s got to be the lawyers. All they need is a token person to start a class action.
@dwayne_dibbly:
Being from MA, and currently looking to buy my first home, I had to laugh at that… If I found a 3BR with a pool for $350K, I’d move in TODAY! :-
@nequam: Actually, paying the $400/month will also leave you unprotected from that lump or car accident… You’ll have to go to the $700-1000/month plans for that to be covered.
Wonderful way to blame the victim.
I hate Mormons so very, very much. Mitt Romney and his teenager-torturing, dog-abusing self fill my throat with so much bile.
So you’re 22 and healthy — good for you. Hope it lasts. Hope you don’t end up like my friend who was diagnosed with MS weeks before her 25th bday. She’s really lucky she had health insurance before her diagnosis, because she sure as hell wouldn’t be able to get it now.
I feel bad for people who are faced with the choice of buying health insurance or putting food on the table. Don’t look for sympathy from me (or anyone) when you wreck that $400/month BMW and your medical expenses exceed any payout from your car insurance.
It’s “I know what’s best for you” additudes like yours that created this damn law. Last I checked those are MY decisions, not yours. If you think im making the wrong choice? Good for you. Too bad its none of your goddamn business.
ain’t this the same asshole state that inflicted ted kennedy upon us???????????
Who is behind this, the Health Insurance companies?
Since when is it governments job to protect people from themselves?
It’s not.
No seatbelts.
No health insurance.
None of the governments business.
@triple:
@5h17h34d:
That’s fine, as long as I don’t have to pick up your slack (through higher health care costs or taxes). It’s amazing how anti-government people can be until they need something.
If you want to spend your money on an expensive car, go ahead — it’s your money. Hell, don’t wear seatbelts if you don’t want to (but please buckle the kids in).
But when you’re suddenly faced with skyrocketing medical bills because you CHOSE not to buy a BMW instead of insurance, don’t look to the government to bail your ass out.
Man, could Ereusch and Michael be bigger bigots?
Needless to say, we don’t like it. Finding the money for the cheapest plan is going to be a challenge, and we resent being compelled to buy it by the state. My husband’s ready to move us back to NH now–we both grew up there–but that’ll have to wait at least until next year, since I have a work contract here in the fall (no benefits, of course).
Really, I didn’t think it was such a bad plan when it was first proposed, but I feel that the voters were misled concerning its execution. For a while, it sounded like it was going to be a state-funded plan for people whose employers didn’t provide insurance. My husband’s doesn’t, so we thought we’d be in luck. Legislation was passed to compel employers to provide it, but it was never enforced. I think that the current affordability concerns are based on unrealistic budgeting–based on what the state believes that people can afford if they spend ideally on housing, particularly. $50,000 for a family of three doesn’t go far, even in our outer-ring city, and there’s certainly no BMW happening here. We’re not asking for subsidies, but we’re sure paying out a lot of them–to the state’s bloated welfare program, to the auto insurance industry, to rising property taxes from the inflated housing market. It’s not wrong for people who are supporting themselves and paying taxes to want equity. But this regulation screws exactly those people. And young, healthy workers are just the people the state is losing already, even before this. I can’t feel that sorry about it. They did it to themselves. No jobs, high expenses, and now this–what did they think would happen?
This policy is almost surely going to raise prices for insurance at least in the short term and screw the consumer.
I don’t claim to be an economist, but based on economic first principles it seems pretty clear what happens when you increase demand by flooding the market with buyers (increased demand = higher prices), and provide the sellers with the information that these same buyers HAVE to buy (information asymetry = higher prices).
And for bonus points, do you suppose benefits will get better or worse when insurance companies are provided with a market flooded with buyers who are compelled to buy?
Maybe the invisible hand will step in and help out eventually, but in the meantime those who can’t afford insurance are going to REALLY not be able to afford insurance.
My $0.02 – everyone should watch Sicko and reflect long and hand about how screwed up market-driven health care really is.
That’s fine, as lng as I don’t have to pick up your slack (through higher health care costs or taxes). It’s amazing how anti-government people can be until they need something.
I’m not asking for -anything-. I’m sure its easy talking like that when your employer picks up the tab. I’m not unemployed, im doing my part. But that’s $4800/year extra towards something that will likely save me a whopping $50. Insurance is meant to bail you out of a sudden expense, not create them.
@triple:
But that’s $4800/year extra towards something that will likely save me a whopping $50.
Do you *really* think your medical bills for a catastrophic illness or injury would total less than $4850?
BTW, my employer doesn’t pick up the tab for my insurance. You know what they say about what happens when we assume…
I lived in Mass. for 9 years. Between state-regulated auto insurance, billions in wasted tax dollars on the Big Dig, and the awful accents – I’ve had enough.
I finally got fed up with the ridiculous tax laws, socialist state goverment, and insane home prices.
I’m out, moving to NC tomorrow.
I make between $40 and $50K a year. With house, car and other types of payments, not to mention the kids. There is no freaking way I will be able to afford $300 a month for insurance, not unless I want to go in debt. I am so glad I am not Mass right now and if this reaches my state I will be long gone.