Republicans were for it before they were against it...

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by detbuch

It could be a huge impediment to a Romney run for president. He claims there are important differences between his Massachusetts plan and the Obama plan. I am not familiar with Romney care. Does it work to your satisfaction? And if it does, why replace it with a costly, contentious, Federal plan. From an outsider's perspective, the advantage of your State plan is that it can already be a model for what works and what doesn't. Other States can apply what is "good" for their circumstance and discard the rest. What is most glaringly non-arguable, is that your citizens can more easily repeal it if they don't like it. Was it approved by a vote of the people? If it was, it certainly passes all constitutional muster. If not, many "conservatives" would have a problem with it. I recall "conservative" commentators arguing against it.

As a business owner, my health related costs have increased. As a resident, my wait for doctors appointments has significantly increased.

My understanding is that MA has the highest concentration of Primary Care Medical Doctors in the nation per capita, yet the longest waiting times for appointments. What's going to happen in other states that don't have the luxury of a high concentration of doctors, yielding more available choices for care?

There should be two lines. One line for people that paid for their health care, and a second line for people that have their health care paid for them. Not only do I have to pay for someone else, but I have to wait in line behind them too??