Massachusetts to provide health care for all

It sounds like a great idea, but is it really? The state of Massachusetts has passed a bill requiring all citizens who can afford it to have health insurance. Anyone who can't afford it will get help from the state. All they need now is the gov's signature to make it law.

I'm worried that the state will make it too easy for people to claim that they don't make enough money to afford insurance, forking the costs over to tax payers. Apparently the state isn't worried about that, "Political leaders in the state's capital, Boston, claim the law will have only a minimal impact on the state budget, with a large chunk of the needed cash coming from the federal government." I don't think that that is right. The state essentially will have no consequences if the plan doesn't work and the rest of us will have to pay for it.

I see two major problems with this plan. Individuals who don't carry health insurance may be required to pay a $1000 fine for not having health insurance, but most of those people who don't have insurance don't have it for the simple reason of affordability. So how does this help other than to spend more tax money. They are not going to be collecting very many fines. And how will they determine if you have insurance in the first place? I can understand requiring car insurance. If you want a license plate you must prove you have insurance, that makes sense. Apparently Massachusetts is saying that if you want a LIFE you must prove you have insurance. I really don't see how this can be constitutional. If I don't want car insurance I don't have to have a car, but what if I don't want health insurance?

The second problem I see is the fines that they are going to put on employers with over 10 employees. "At the same time the bill envisages levying fees from private businesses with more than 10 workers that fail to provide health insurance for their payrolls. The fee would be $295 per worker per year." Maybe I'm wrong, but doesn't it already cost employers much more than that to provide healthcare? Heck, I pay more than that myself for my share of my healthcare plan at work. So if you own a business it might be cheaper just to pay the fine. Now we are talking about all kinds of employers dumping their employee healthcare plans. That is not good, but perhaps it might kickstart a change in the health insurance business and end up with lower fees for individuals, but I doubt it since they will pay whatever it takes to get insurance before paying the fines. Or maybe they won't since a $1000 fine is cheaper than actually getting the insurance anyway. And what does that mean provide health insurance? Does that mean pay the full cost or provide the option to the employee without the business paying anything?

This whole thing wreaks of poor planning, but I am still anxious to see what happens when the government intervenes in the free market. The government doesn't belong in the insurance business. That can be witnessed by social security and medicare/medicaid.