Exploding the myth that Mitt Romney’s health-care program in Massachusetts is a failure


One of the great ironies of the impending 2012 presidential election campaign is that Mitt Romney’s greatest success as governor of Massachusetts is a negative in his bid for the Republican nomination.

Such is the pathetic state of today’s GOP.

The persistent myth that health-care reform in Massachusetts is a failure is countered in THIS COLUMN by a couple of health professionals and in this LITANY OF FACTS of the matter.

And then there’s THIS POLL, showing that the vast majority of Massachusetts residents like the program.



  1. Sorry to burst your bubble but the poll you are referring to about Romneycare was not conducted among all Massachusetts residents but only among the residents that receive free or subsidized health insurance. The Huffington Post links to a Reuters story that is incorrect (surprise/surprise on both counts!)

    Here is the actual press release about the poll from the state of Massachusetts((https://www.mahealthconnector.org/portal/binary/com.epicentric.contentmanagement.servlet.ContentDeliveryServlet/About%2520Us/News%2520and%2520Updates/2011/Week%20Beginning%20March%2006/CommCare_Survey_pr_3-10-11.pdf).

    The only news in the referenced poll is that 16% of the people that receive free insurance from us Massachusetts taxpayers don’t like their free insurance. Go figure!

    The most recent relevant poll among all Mass. residents – but it has methodological problems – has been interpreted by the press to say that a plurality of Massachusetts residents are dissatisfied with Romneycare by a 5-4 margin. See http://byrondennis.typepad.com/masshealthstats/2011/04/interesting-suffolk-university-poll-on-romneycare-but-really-flawed.html

  2. Didn’t notice this at first read but the other two sources you cite are also almost 100% wrong.

    The item from the Center for American Progress is like zero for seven in citing facts that are allegedly addressing myths:
    1. It uses the % of adults for the 2006 number and % of all residents for the 2010 number. This is such an obvious error that the Center must have been pursposely trying to fool you
    2. It mixes up group insurance with employer sponsored insurance (ESI) in its second fact: ESI is down by tens of thousands in Massachusetts
    3. Non group insurance premiums are not down 40% since Romneycare but are up about 50%. This is too complicated to explain in a blog comment but think about it: If premiums were down in Massachusetts, don’t you think we’d be dancing in the streets. And why did Deval Patrick close the non-group insurance market twice during 2010–because of proposed rates– if premiums were down? Plus this “fact” only relates to 40,000 people out of 6,400,000
    4. Before 2010, there was a major problem with people only buying insurance when they needed it and then dropping it after they had an operation or whatever. The legislature changed Romneycare in 2010 to stop the practice. This is so well known and documented that again the Center for American Progress must by trying to fool you people from outside Massachusetts intentionally
    5. Romneycare is costing $400-$500 million more than planned according to the source cited (and that source is not telling the whole story). The plan was that Romneycare would cost nothing after a startup funded by the Federal government waiver. Only to people like the Center for American Progress would $400-$500 million over plan be “about was expected.”
    6. Romneycare is becoming less popular over time, not more popular. See http://www.suffolk.edu/46306.html, about the fifth section down. Currently residents are 50% to 40% against it with 10% undecided.
    7. The final Center for American Progress “fact” is a lot of crap about the rest of the U.S. None of it applies to Massachusetts. Massachusetts has the best healthcare in world and that has been true for decades

    As for your other source, the column in the Washingto Post, remember what Romneycare is and then look at the authors of the Washington Post article. Romneycare was simply a change in the Massachusetts health insurance market as it relates to the state budget. It had nothing to do with healthcare itself. The idea was to take state money previously given to the inner city charity hospitals and community health centers to care for the indigent and instead give it to the politically connected insurance companies and large Boston teaching hospitals to “buy” the indigient health insurance so they could be treated at the teaching hospitals. Like I say, look at who wrote the Washington Post article. Then note that one of the Boston inner city hospitals — St. Elizabeth’s — has already been sold and sales of inner city hospitals that took care of the poor in SE Mass are in the process of being sold.

    Like I said in my other comment, sorry to burst your bubble but you people outside Mass. are being manipulated by propaganda.

    — Dennis Byron

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *