The New York Times has an editorial on Massachusetts:
Massachusetts’s pioneering plan to provide universal health coverage is off to a good start and is heartening evidence that national health care reform may be possible if sufficient skill and determination are applied to forge a political consensus.
Here's the good start later in the editorial:
The chief criticism, however, is that costs have risen faster than the original projections, forcing the state to raise its spending estimates for the current fiscal year from $472 million to $625 million and from $725 million to $869 million for next year. The shortfall occurred mostly because the state underestimated the number of uninsured residents and how fast low-income people would sign up for subsidized coverage. It is a warning to other states to keep projections realistic.
Good start?
