“Not every state has the same set of circumstances that we inherited to our benefit,” said Moore. He said the federal government could have set broad goals such as universal coverage, sliding scale subsidies, and minimum coverage standards that allow states to use a mix of federal and private dollars to expand. There should still be an individual mandate, he added, but only if coverage is affordable.

Andrew Dreyfus, chief executive of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts and another supporter of the Massachusetts and national health care plans, said the question has popped up in meetings he has attended around the country, with increasing frequency.

“People keep peppering me with the question about Massachusetts wherever I go outside the state,” he said. “Given what’s going on in Washington, was the Massachusetts model a good one to use?”

Dreyfus said he believes the answer is yes — the Massachusetts model is still a viable option for the country in the long term — but that “it isn’t right for every state now.”

“In some ways, we may see the Affordable Care Act evolve into a more state-based system,” Dreyfus said. “Some states may look very much like Massachusetts, and some may look a lot different or may take a lot longer period to get to where we got.”