National Health Preview

As the WSJ notes, Massachusetts gives us a good example of how a government-mandated health care program, however well-intentioned, ends up - raising costs and cutting services.

In Massachusetts's latest crisis, Governor Deval Patrick and his Democratic colleagues are starting to move down the path that government health plans always follow when spending collides with reality -- i.e., price controls. As costs continue to rise, the inevitable results are coverage restrictions and waiting periods. It was only a matter of time.

...What really whipped along RomneyCare were claims that health care would be less expensive if everyone were covered. But reducing costs while increasing access are irreconcilable issues. Mr. Romney should have known better before signing on to this not-so-grand experiment, especially since the state's "free market" reforms that he boasts about have proven to be irrelevant when not fictional.

Finally, the uninsured population in Massachusetts is far lower than the national average, which means ObamaCare is going to be even worse, with greater deficits and more controls, than in Massachusetts. There are two important lessons here:

1) Opposition to a bad idea (such as government-run healthcare) is always better than "bipartisan compromise" on that bad idea;
2) Apart from the military, government-run anything is a bad idea (see Postal Service, Amtrak, Social Security, Medicare,...).

*Update*
Perhaps this is part of the reason that nearly half of all Mass. residents say "it's time to elect someone else" instead of Deval Patrick. From Red State.