We all know Obamacare is Romneycare and Romneycare is Obamacare and that the Bay State has set the standard for everything health reform—from the individual mandate right down to ways to cut its gigantic medical bill. Or at least the media have passed along that narrative. The Wall Street Journal’s recent piece, “Same State, New Stab at Health Care,”was no exception. But it did not quite tell the whole story. The piece focused on what Massachusetts may be doing to reduce medical costs and overlooked what neighboring Vermont is already doing.
Let’s face it. Vermont is easy to dismiss. Its small population, liberal patina, and the fact that it has passed a bill that might lead to single-payer health care down the road make it a health reform outlier, far less muscular than its neighbor to the south. But we’re remiss in treating it as a stepchild when it comes to controlling health care costs. In many ways, it is trailblazer, and the press should recognize it as such.
The Journal’s piece gave the news: Massachusetts legislators unveiled legislation that would propose setting a target for the rate at which the state’s health spending should rise, which the Journal reported “would once again put the state in the forefront of efforts to remake the American health-care system.” The state, the Journal continued, is considered a laboratory, and if it manages to reduce spending, that “initiative too could eventually be imitated elsewhere.” It quoted a reliable observer from the health care cognoscenti, Paul Ginsburg, the head of a Washington think tank, the Center for Health System Change. Ginsburg said no state or initiative of the federal government has implemented such a broad effort. “There will be a lot of attention to what Massachusetts is doing,” Ginsburg told the Journal.
Anya Rader Wallack, who runs Vermont’s Green Mountain Care Board, took issue with that, telling me Ginsburg’s comment was “inaccurate.” “It leads one to believe there’s no other state working on it,” she said. “The introduction of a bill is seen as groundbreaking, when other states are already further ahead in addressing health care cost containment. “Vermont is one such state. The Green Mountain Care Board, created as part of last year’s legislation that put in place a plan for moving to a single-payer health system, “has broad responsibility and a fair amount of regulatory power,” she explained, and one of its tasks is to contain the state’s health care spending.
- 1
- 2
No surprise to those of us who live here that Vermont continues to lead the way on important initiatives We were among the earliest states to prohibit slavery, first to ban billboards and non-deposit bottles and cans, led the movement toward safe local food and sustainable agriculture, and now will provide the first indigenous model for universal health care.
#1 Posted by David Schoales, CJR on Tue 15 May 2012 at 05:18 PM
Impressive, David Schoales. Very impressive. The race is on. As you probably know, a there is a long, tough road ahead for Vermont to maybe getting a state-version of single-payer health care by 2017. And even then it would NOT be a "strict single-payer", as noted in two places in the following web page about the status.
http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Vermont
In the meantime Americans across ALL 50 states could use that five years to help get national single-payer health care for ALL Americans: a TRUE single-payer. (meaning maximum benefits)
Yes, indeed, the race is on. Vermont is doing fantastic work, but let's also take action nationally ...
http://www.mforall.org/p/Million_Letters_Campaign
..... - Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate
#2 Posted by bob4healthcare, CJR on Tue 15 May 2012 at 09:51 PM
So, let me get this straight... It seems that prisoners in jail get better access and more affordable health care than good upstanding citizens do. Yeah, we need REAL health care reform...NOW and "Penny Health"!
#3 Posted by danielpeterss, CJR on Wed 16 May 2012 at 07:43 AM
How do health care outcomes, not intentions, stack up in Vermont versus what might be called the 'anti-Vermont', Utah? I mean actual outcomes, now, not how many social programs (once thought to be means to ends, not ends themselves) have been enacted.
Skeptics of statist insurance have warned that issues like health care and indeed the overall economy are strongly a function of culture, and not of plugging in one-size-fits-all programs. Here we have two states that have demographic similarities, if the circumstance of being nearly 'all-white' in population is a driver. Otherwise, the two states are strikingly dissimilar. Vermont has perhaps the most left-wing civic culture of any state, Utah has among the most right-wing; one is old-line Protestant in its history, the other Mormon; one has an aging population relative to the country as a whole, the other has the youngest median age in the country; one has been relatively stagnant in terms of population growth (=jobs), while the other is growing relative to other states. My 'culture' argument implies that the politics are more outcomes of culture rather than a driver of them.
A compare-and-contrast would be interesting. I'm just asking. I find few journalistic efforts devoted to comparing leftist vs. rightist states.
#4 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Wed 16 May 2012 at 05:08 PM