Fortunately, each of the 14 pens used to sign yesterday's Massachusetts health care bill will be more consequential than the one that Governor Mitt Romney used to block eight items from the original version. The Massachusetts legislature will almost undoubtedly hurdle the roadblock that Romney has placed on the path to universal health care.
This historic legislation comes with historic support: With a unanimous vote in the state Senate and all but two state representatives voting for the measure, the bill quite obviously has the support of both legislators and their constituents. The legislative process that led to this bill was a series of compromises and inventive solutions on the part of both parties, the results of which are represented in the overwhelmingly favorable vote.
In spite of this massive approval, however, Governor Romney struck down, along with seven other elements, one of the key provisions of the law, an item that would require employers who do not provide health care to contribute $295 towards a universal healthcare fund.
Luckily, notwithstanding Romney's choice to exercise his line-item veto power, the margin of approval in the legislature virtually guarantees that the veto will be overriden. As Democratic House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi confidently told reporters yesterday, the legislature "will override all of [Romney's] vetoes."
The question that presents itself, then, is why Romney vetoed these eight provisions. According to the governor, he believes the $295 fee places an undue extra burden on businesses. It is worth noting that the fee would upset a portion of Romney's Republican supporters throughout the state (and by extension the country) and would blemish his essential pro-business voting record in his search for presidential victory in 2008.
Talking to reporters, DiMasi questioned whether the governor was using the vetoes "for purposes of making the bill work or making him look good politically." Romney clearly knows that the bill will pass in its original form, and his token veto is both inconsequential and disappointing in its triviality.
Dimasi's question is justified. The governor has opted to put his own political posturing ahead of an avalanche of support from the rest of the state. As a result, instead of celebrating a measure which will provide health care to 95 percent of Massachusetts residents in the space of three years, residents must wait for another unnecessary legislative override.
That said, the bill is by no means perfect. But despite its drawbacks and imperfections, this new health care plan should be put in action as soon as possible. The bill may create temporarily stressful situations while uninsured residents adjust their budgets for requisite premiums. This will be particularly hard on families who are over the poverty line but earn less than $39,000, but sliding scale premiums must be enforced to allow for affordable care.
The initiative represents years of cooperative work and takes a well designed approach in applying a market solution to health care. The bill would have likely failed without continued support from Romney as well as chamber leaders DiMasi and Senate President Robert Travaglini.
As Massachusetts becomes the first state to institute universal health care, there are already murmurs about how applications could work in other states. The Commonwealth presents a unique situation due to its relatively liberal history regarding health care, though similar initiatives could be pursued once they have been adapted to local situations.
Romney presented an amazing coup in gathering partisan support to institute the bill. Unfortunately, his veto leaves a bad taste in the mouth of everyone counting on this legislation to pass, and it underscores the vulgarity of party politics.
Every extra day the approximately 500,000 currently uninsured residents of Massachusetts are forced to wait for health care can be chalked up to Governor Romney's duplicitous political posturing. We've waited a long time for this new, potentially-innovative health care plan. We shouldn't have to wait longer just so Romney can mix politics and policy.
