When Washington Democrats rushed to overhaul our nation’s health care system, they spent more time considering liberal ideology than real-world experience. Instead of learning from the mistakes of government-run health care, particularly in states which have tried it, they just assumed good intentions would be enough to create a good system.
Well, before rushing to pass an unpopular bill, they should have look to the Massachusetts,s where in 2006, politicians “created near-universal coverage for residents, which was supposed to ease the traffic in hospital emergency rooms.” Yet, instead of easing traffic in hospital emergency rooms, according to “a recent poll by the American College of Emergency Physicians,” nearly the opposite occurred: “nearly two-thirds of the state’s residents say emergency department wait times have either increased or remained the same.”
And it looks like what happened in Massachusetts may soon happen across the country:
People who build hospitals, however, say newly insured people will still go to emergency rooms for primary care because they don’t have a doctor.
“Everybody expected that one of the initial impacts of reform would be less pressure on emergency departments; it’s going to be exactly the opposite over the next four to eight years,” said Rich Dallam, a healthcare partner at the architectural firm NBBJ, which designs healthcare facilities.
“We don’t have the primary care infrastructure in place in America to cover the need. Our clients are looking at and preparing for more emergency department volume, not less,” he said.
Why is it that those determined to turn to the state for solution to our country’s problems refuse to learn from experience?