Costs soar for Mass. health care law

Well, what did they expect?

"Two years after the state's landmark health law was signed, the cracks are starting to show.

Costs are soaring and Massachusetts lawmakers are weighing a dollar-a-pack hike in the state's cigarette tax to help pay for a larger-than-expected enrollment in the law's subsidized insurance plans.

But that hasn't dampened enthusiasm at the Statehouse."

It is only in the domain of politics that such impossibility can exist and be lauded.

Still.

"One of the most radical fixtures of the law is the so-called 'individual mandate' — the requirement that virtually everyone have health insurance or face tax penalties.

The "individual mandate" should be that, generally speaking, each individual who wants the insurance is mandated to have a BMI between 18.5 and 24.9 or they cannot qualify.

That would save costs and the system.

"Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute, said the law has been an unqualified failure.

Tanner was critical of the connector authority, a 'super-regulatory agency' which has mandated levels of coverage. He also noted the vast majority of the newly insured are receiving subsidized care.

'They said it would get us universal coverage and reduce costs and it's done neither,' Tanner said.

The biggest challenge is rising costs.

In 2006, a legislative committee estimated the law would cost about $725 million in the fiscal year starting in July. In his budget, Patrick set aside $869 million, but those overseeing the law have already acknowledged costs will rise even higher.

Lawmakers are hoping to close the gap in part with a new cigarette tax expected to generate about $154 million a year."

The biggest boondoggle is sick care reform.

If you fall for it, you are a friggin' moron.

Do not believe the politicians hype and promise.

The only way to improve sick care, is to improve your condition.

And the only way to do that is to get fitter.

Period.