Oh, no, say it isn’t so.  Massachusetts Health Care Reform Not as Successful as Lawmakers Claim, Free Market Analyst Says

Lawmakers are painting a rose-colored picture of Massachusetts’ 2006 health care reform, according to Michael Tanner, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of the book, “Health Competition: What’s Holding Back Health Care and How to Free It.”

Although Massachusetts’ health care system is often cited as a model for national reform, Tanner said the data show that lawmakers and some media are skewing the facts to downplay the reality of health care in the Bay State.

“It does not look like the Massachusetts plan has actually been successful at accomplishing what it set out to accomplish according to its proponents, if you want to judge it by their criteria,” Tanner said at a panel discussion on Monday at the U.S. Capitol.

We should look before we leap:

Tanner said it is important to look more closely at health care reform in Massachusetts to address the issue on the national level.

“We started with a program that increased subsidies and limited choice. That led to growing costs, [and] that led to tax on expenditures, [and] that led to waiting times – the whole range that led right down the road to national health care,” he said.

Three years ago, Tanner wrote that the Massachusetts reform would result “in a slow but steady spiral downward toward a government-run health care system,” he said. “Three years in, I think that that is proving true and we are in the middle of that spiral downward toward a government-run health care plan this past week.”

Fool us once, shame on you.  Fool us twice, shame on…