A Boston Globe editorial a href="http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2009/08/05/mass_bashers_take_note_health_reform_is_working/"has the statement and the details behind the claim/a. I think they’re reasonably right, but the state will have tougher choices in the future, just like when Bill Clinton’s “welfare reform” punted some tough issues down the road.br /br /And, a “public option” would be a tool to help with those tough choices, but, you can’t expect something like that to be done on a state-by-state basis. Southern states would, again, engage in a race to the bottom, which is exactly why Southern Senators promote, if anything concrete, a “federalized” healthcare “reform” plan.br /br /Massachusetts, beyond not wanting to have a state-based “public option,” also benefits from a low rate of uninsureds as a starting point, and also, surely, from a stronger state regulatory climate than a place like here in Tejas.div class="blogger-post-footer"There is no god and I am his prophet.img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/7532871-8583882717556086401?l=socraticgadfly.blogspot.com'//div
technorati tags:
political news | news | world news
More at: News 2 Cromley
No comments:
Post a Comment