Posted by
Robert Morris on Friday, November 16, 2007 2:05:46 PM
Recently the Fred Thompson campaign has been sending around an email ripping on Romney's health care plan he put together in Massachusetts. They make the following points:
1) You must have health care or be fined.
2) The Commonwealth care plan allows $50 copay for abortions.
The message also says Romney has tried to distance himself from the plan.
Go to http://www.mahealthconnector.org/portal/site/connector/ for more info, but here's the basic scoop.
In Massachusetts you are required to have insurance. The biggest push is that you get it from a non-government source. However, if you have 3 times the poverty level of income or less (see http://www.cms.hhs.gov/medicaideligibility/downloads/POV07ALL.pdf for poverty line info), you may be eligible for "Commonwealth Care." This plan is typically cheaper than the independent sources (it's actually free for those at the poverty line), and it does actually offer $50 copay on abortions. So, the point is, everyone is required to have health insurance one way or another.
Mitt Romney hasn't denied he pushed for everyone to have healthcare; he actually states it clearly in his website (https://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/Health_Care). He says that since everyone takes from the health care system, everyone should be required to contribute to it. The fact that laws require people to have health care is something Romney will take credit for. He won't however, take responsibility for everything the Commonwealth Care plan covers (ie abortions).
This makes sense in this country, because emergency rooms are required by law to treat anyone who needs it. This means those who can't or won't pay for the treatment, still get it. So, who pays for those services? Everyone else pays, through higher premiums and doctor bills. Basically, Mitt is saying those people who are getting something for nothing need to be stopped, and this is the only way to do it.
The question is whether or not there is another way to stop this problem. Will a Christian nation repeal the laws that say emergency services must be given even when they are not paid for ? Will a Christian nation allow a man to bleed to death, because he can't afford to pay for medical attention? Unfortunately, unless we are ready to let him die, we probably have no other option than what Mitt is suggesting.
I hope someone else has a better idea, because even though I can see the point, I can't feel good about being forced to have health care.