It seems that FactCheck.org did some research on the MA Health Care Bill that they posted just the other day.
This is some of what they found. Their article wanted to set the record straight on some claims about MA Health Care (Romneycare):
1. The major components of the state and federal law are similar, but details vary. The federal law put a greater emphasis on cost-control measures, for instance. Massachusetts is just now tackling that.
Analysis: ........Massachusetts has a lower coverage requirement for employers, putting just a $295 per employee “fair share assessment” on businesses that don’t provide insurance. The national law, meanwhile, has a fine of $2,000 per employee for companies that don’t offer coverage, have more than 50 workers and have at least one who receives a premium credit.......2. The state law was successful on one big goal: A little more than 98 percent of state residents now have insurance.
Analysis: .....The latest number from the state Division of Health Care Finance and Policy: 98.1 percent of Massachusetts residents had health insurance in 2010.......The state does better in covering children — 99.8 percent of kids are estimated to have insurance. (Nationally, the figure is 92.6 percent.)....
.......Huckabee was dead wrong when he said that the law "ended up having almost the polar opposite effect of what was intended." A major goal — if not the goal — was to reduce the number of uninsured. The state was very successful in that regard. We called and e-mailed the press office for Huckabee’s political action committee several times, asking for back-up for his claims. A spokesman told us he would get back to us, but we have not yet received a response. We will update this article if we do.
Analysis:....It certainly takes money to create a subsidy program and expand Medicaid coverage. But is the Massachusetts law “bankrupting” the state? The foundation says no. In May 2009 it put out a report called “The Myth of Uncontrolled Costs," which concluded that the net added cost to Massachusetts taxpayers was $353 million in 2010, or roughly 1.2 percent of the state budget....4. Premiums went up.
Analysis: ....The truth about premiums is that they’ve gone down for those who buy their own insurance (in what had been the so-called "individual market’), and the health care law is given credit for several reasons. And while premiums have gone up for large employers who buy coverage for their workers (the so-called "large group market"), there’s no clear evidence that the law was the cause....
6. Public support has been high. One poll found that 68.5 percent of non-elderly adults supported the law in 2006; 67 percent still do.
Claim: "… people were greatly dissatisfied." — Huckabee
Claim: "Massachusetts has a state health insurance program that they’re happy with." —
....Score one for Haley Barbour. The state’s health care efforts haven’t been plagued by claims about grandma’s life-support, as we saw on the federal level. For now, public support and physician support are both high in the state......Read the full article and extensive analysis HERE.