In The News: Health Care

Springfield has $761.6 million in the unfunded liabilities, which translates to more than $12,000 in unfunded liabilities per single-family home; Holyoke would be on the hook for $300 million, which translates to a liability of more than $18,000 per single-family home. And eight other cities in the commonwealth are in similar straits. “It’s a classic problem of the public sector,” said Michael J. Widmer, Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation president, “You vote for all these benefits knowing what the cost will be in the future. But of course, you’re not going to be in office by then.”

RomneyCare is also not breaking the bank in Massachusetts, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, an independent research group that many call the state’s version of the Congressional Budget Office. “There’s a lot of wild accusations that the law is breaking the bank in Massachusetts, and that is simply not the case,” said Michael Widmer, president of the Foundation.

“I think we will see some meaningful relief,” said Michael Widmer, head of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Association. “I’m hopeful that we’ll see some innovation as well. Employers are increasingly beginning to say ‘we need to be a part of the solution,’ and their employees as well.”

Regarding Santorum’s criticisms of high health care costs and unreasonable waiting times in Massachusetts as a result of the health care plan enacted by Romney, the nonpartisan FactCheck.org has already found those claims shaky at best. Costs for the plan had initially increased more than expected, but have lately come in line with projections by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. PolitiFact has ruled false a super PAC's ad claim that the Romney law sent health costs spiraling.

The foundation, a Boston-based independent, nonprofit organization that conducts research on state and local taxes, government spending, and the economy, says the liabilities are not some hypothetical obligation but represent actual amounts taxpayers owe in today’s dollars for retiree health-care benefits already earned by current retirees and eligible employees and payable during the next 30 years.

A much lower estimate was issued by the nonpartisan Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, whichestimated that the law cost $707 million in fiscal 2010, with the state paying half of that and the federal government paying the rest.

Speaking of “fixed” costs (see above) the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation is out with a truly frightening report on the threat posed to municipal budgets by the cost of providing health care to retirees.

The study, from the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, shows that Brockton owes more per household than any of the ten cities analyzed. Brockton owes just under $700 million in health care benefits for current and future retirees over the next 30 years.

A report released by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation showed that Brockton owes more, per household, in unfunded future health care costs than any of the 10 cities it analyzed. In today’s dollars, Brockton owes $693 million in health care benefits for current and future retirees over the next 30 years.

“Neither of those options are feasible,” says MTF president Michael Widmer. He recommends scaling back retiree benefits and/or changing what cities and towns have promised current employees. Specifically, Widmer suggests increasing the age by which municipal workers can retire early from 55 to 60 and extending the number of years they must work (now 10) to receive full health coverage.