Conservatives complain that coverage in Massachusetts is still relatively expensive and that early costs were higher than expected. They’re right—largely because Romneycare was implemented immediately, without cost controls in place. As a result, the program experienced an initial budget shortfall and premiums remained steep. But now, as the legislature tackles expenses, the net cost of the plan has stabilized at a little more than 1 percent of the state’s budget. And while some rates are still rising, others—like nongroup individual premiums—have declined by as much as 40 percent. Best of all, only 160,000 Massachusettans are uninsured today, down from 600,000 in 2006…
Ultimately, conservatives who treat Romneycare like an albatross rather than an achievement are discouraging local Republican leaders from pursuing reasonable center-right solutions. In the 1980s and 1990s the most innovative welfare, education, job-training, and economic-development programs emerged from state capitals controlled by Republicans. Tommy Thompson spearheaded the national push for welfare reform from Wisconsin; in Michigan, John Engler proved that high standards, rigorous assessments, and strong public charter schools could boost student achievement. When these policies went mainstream, the GOP didn’t disown them—it applauded. But now the party seems to be too obsessed with oppositionism to contribute constructively to the national conversation. During a speech in Baltimore on Feb. 2, 2007, Romney outlined his ambitions for the Massachusetts plan. “I’m proud of what we’ve done,” he said. “If Massachusetts succeeds in implementing it, then that will be a model for the nation.” Last month Romney’s dream came true. If Republicans knew what was good for them, they would stop treating it as a nightmare.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member