Massachusetts Officials Considering Ways To Address Rising Costs of Health Program
Gov. Deval Patrick (D) would not rule out a possible increase in the $295-per-employee fee that some businesses contribute annually for Massachusetts' Commonwealth Care health insurance program, saying on Wednesday that "[e]verything is on the table" for discussions about controlling costs of the program, the Boston Herald reports. The annual assessment is paid by employers that have 11 or more employees and do not offer employer-sponsored health insurance.
About 176,000 people were enrolled in the state-subsidized Commonwealth Care program as of March, which is "far more than anticipated at this point," according to the Herald. Patrick said that shortfalls in funding for the program have resulted from its success because more people have signed up than lawmakers projected. For the next fiscal year, the state has estimated that costs will increase to $869 million, but the estimate must be revised because of continued enrollment growth, according to the Herald. Some have estimated that an additional $150 million is needed to cover the program's deficit (Fitzgerald, Boston Herald, 3/27).
Opinion Pieces
- Christopher Anderson, Boston Globe: "Despite national attention for the 2006 reform plan, health care in Massachusetts has reached a crisis point" because the "crushing costs of the program endanger its long-term viability," Anderson, president of the Massachusetts High Technology Council, writes in a Globe opinion piece. According to Anderson, the "crisis has been brought about by the failure to address costs while focusing almost exclusively on access." Even though state Senate President Therese Murray (D) "deserves significant credit for proposing the first plan to address the serious challenge of controlling health costs without any new broad-base taxes," the "recommendation to ban many forms of interaction with doctors keeps the pharmaceutical companies from effectively educating doctors on life-altering drugs," Anderson writes. In addition, it "would be shortsighted for the commonwealth to commit $1 billion for the state's life sciences industry while simultaneously undercutting biopharmaceutical employers that are expected to create jobs here," according to Anderson. Anderson writes, "If the state deliberately works against the biopharmaceutical sector, it is hurting the entire life sciences community and, ultimately, patient care." He says a "much better idea" would be to reform medical malpractice laws by creating a "system that minimizes frivolous lawsuits and provides protections to doctors [that] would greatly stabilize skyrocketing malpractice premiums, which are driving many good doctors out of the state." Anderson concludes that "all stakeholders in the debate must work together to make sure it is done right" (Anderson, Boston Globe, 3/31).
- State Rep. Jeffrey Perry (R), Boston Herald: "As we approach the two-year anniversary of the Massachusetts health care mandate law, we are learning that our poorest residents will have to pay even more for their insurance premiums and copayments or face the ever-growing sanctions of state government," Perry writes in a Herald opinion piece. Perry continues that lawmakers "did practically zero to reduce costs" and maybe even "created new costs" through the mandate. Perry writes that all lawmakers "really did was force everyone in the commonwealth to purchase a health insurance policy and impose a new tax on the business community." He concludes that "elected officials need to make tough decisions and take tough votes to really reform the way" health care is delivered if they "want to do something positive regarding health care reform" (Perry, Boston Herald, 3/28).
