Yesterday, Vermont Governor Pete Shumlin signed into law legislation that will set Vermont off on the road to a single-payer health care system.  The law establishes a state health benefits exchange, which offers "competing" plans from both private insurance companies and the state.  The exchange, called Green Mountain Care, will be managed by a panel of five so-called experts who will decide reimbursement rates for doctors and hospitals for services provided. The deliberate goal of the plan is to kill off private insurers in the medium to long term.

To take an optimistic spin on this otherwise dreary foray into socialized medicine, Vermont's experiment with single-payer health care could prove once and for all that the claim that such a system can contain costs is but a pipe dream, that the rationing of care is an inevitability, and that the government will have no choice but to require tax hikes in order to sustain the scheme in the long term.

On the other hand, as Dr. David Gratzer pessimistically supposes in the pages of the Wall Street Journal, when Vermont's clinical trial of a single payer system fails, what's to keep American liberals from pretending it's the state's fault and not a flaw in the system? 

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

KC Mulville
Joined
Jan '11
KC Mulville

Note to self: Don't get sick in Vermont.

Stuart Creque
Joined
Dec '10
Stuart Creque

The liberals will say its failure was due to the fact that it was only one state implementing the system, that it can only work if it's adopted nationally.

Troy Senik

I hope you're right about this, Diane. Like Dr. Gratzer, however, I have my doubts. Statism tends to be non-falsifiable. Hell, there are even communists who still claim that the only problem with their system was in the implementation.

Then there's the other consideration: even if Vermont does become a cautionary tale, that will be cold comfort to the folks who suffer at the hands of the single-payer system. Those feeling ill in Vermont should start examining the real estate market in New Hampshire.

Diane Ellis, Ed.: To take an optimistic spin on this otherwise dreary foray into socialized medicine, Vermont's experiment with single-payer health care could prove once and for all that the claim that such a system can contain costs is but a pipe dream, that the rationing of care is an inevitability, and that the government will have no choice but to require tax hikes in order to sustain the scheme in the long term.
Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

All those Lefty doctors who moved to Vermont from Massachusetts will be packing their bags.

C. U. Douglas
Joined
Apr '11
C. U. Douglas
Troy Senik: I hope you're right about this, Diane. Like Dr. Gratzer, however, I have my doubts. Statism tends to be non-falsifiable. Hell, there are even communists who still claim that the only problem with their system was in the implementation... · May 27 at 11:30am

I'm in agreement here.  It is not the results that matter to the Statist, but their intentions.  If the system doesn't produce intended results, there's always a convenient scapegoat.

It reminds me of an interview with a British journalist (I'm afraid this is anecdotal as I forget his name) who, when asked if Socialized Medicine works considering the state of health care in the UK, stated that "fully funded" it does.  Despite evidence that the system was a failure, it was clear in his mind that it was still the best idea to pursue.

Dan
Joined
Apr '11
Dan IV

My hope is that this will create a Vermont Tea Party movement, though I'm not very optimistic.

AmishDude
Joined
Dec '10
AmishDude

You will note that they never propose a single-payer system for legal care.

Douglas
Joined
Mar '11
Douglas

 We know what's going to happen here. As an earlier poster noted, when it fails, they'll simply claim that if only it was national it would work. But they's still trumpet about how great it is, all while people that can afford it go to neighboring states for serious care. Just like the Canadians.

Crab bait
Joined
Apr '11
Crab bait

That and... inadequate funding.

Stuart Creque: The liberals will say its failure was due to the fact that it was only one state implementing the system, that it can only work if it's adopted nationally. · May 27 at 11:29am
Kozak
Joined
May '10
Kozak

 This is great. One of the main reasons Vermont's medical costs are rising much faster then the national average is the mandating of coverage for people with preexisting conditions.  So every intervention by the government breeds more fail and more intervention....

Ross Conatser
Joined
Sep '10
Ross Conatser

Let a thousand flowers bloom I say.

There is no reason to think single payer in Vermont will work worse than it does in Canada.  The existence of other providers in neighboring states and the ability for people to move out of state will act as substantial deterrents to the single payer system becoming too....how do I say it....Postal?  That being said, I am encouraged when lefty states take action to organize themselves as they would like rather than trying to force it on everyone federally all at once.

So good luck to the Vermonters.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In