Talk:Massachusetts health care reform

message: Can people buying health insurance on the individual market be denied coverage because they have pre-existing conditions as they can be elsewhere?  This a big part of the debate on health care reform and since Massachusetts is one model the Feds may follow this would be an important fact to include in the article. --Jfruh (talk) 01:01, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-existing conditions? 

message: This article needs to be gutted.  It has like a 20 paragraph lead (the biggest I think ive seen actually, only needs the first paragraph in lead..).. and the whole article is just way too wordy.. takes paragraphs to say what can be said in a sentence..  has terrible sourcing.  anyone wants to take a stab a this feel free...It needs it -Tracer9999 (talk) 15:29, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I can agree with that, though it looks like the article's lead has been changed since your comment. Anyway, I read through this today and there was a lot of un-sourced information+most paragraphs don't have much direction to them.--Dark Charles (talk) 02:53, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs massive cleanup 

message: The legal challenges section, which covers Fountas v. Dormitzer, seems to give undue weight to the challenges and arguments made against the act, going into great detail across several paragraphs about specific legal theories.  There's a fairly negative tone when discussing the holdings of the various courts, including even a critical view of one of the courts' references. Additionally, apart from any point of view concerns, the section seems to be significantly too long; two paragraphs or so would seem to suffice to describe the legal challenge, and then its outcome. 72.66.31.230 (talk) 18:48, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  It seems to me that a lot of it is personal opinions about the validity or not of the rulings.  If the article is going to have commentary on the rulings it should be from credible sources and not just original research (for want of a better description of the legal theories that the author is putting forth against the judges' findings). 174.111.242.35 (talk) 14:35, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal challenges section 

message: Are children under a certain age covered under mass health automaticly?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3dconstruction (talk • contribs) 18:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Children under 10 coverage 

message: The article has a section titled Employer Taxes and another section titled Individual Taxes. While reading the content of those sections, it seems to me that the sections should be use the word Penalties rather than Taxes. Penalties are assessed by the government if an individual or employer does not do something that it is required to do. Taxes are assessed by the government on income, sales, and so forth. Your thoughts? ~ Quacks Like a Duck (talk) 15:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tax vs. penalty 

message: Wikipedia Page Proposal: Reorganize and Update Data
We are looking to update any outdated data in the article as well as reorganize the content into clearer sections. Below you will find a detailed layout of what we had in mind. Currently there are separate sections for the legislation, implementation, and outcomes. We propose instead to organize sections by issue (the individual mandate, employer coverage, etc) and to discuss the legislation, implementation, and outcomes of each issue. We believe this will make the content more readable – since currently discussion of each issue is scattered throughout the article and it is difficult to connect the dots between the individual mandate provision, its implementation, and its outcomes on insurance coverage, for example.
While we do this we would like to add some new content, such as in the origins of the law – which currently doesn’t even mention the Medicaid waiver that drove the entire political process – and also in the realm of outcomes, where there is a lot of new data available since this article was last updated.
We would like to open this discussion to anyone who is interested in editing this article before making any changes. Please let us know if you have any input. 
Proposed New Structure
1. Overview
2. Origins of the Law
   a. Add mention of Medicaid waiver and other ballot initiative
   b. Move "Legislation" section in to this
3. Insurance Coverage
   a. Overview
   b. Public Programs: Commonwealth care, (CeltiCare), Commonwealth Choice, Mass Health, safety    net
   c. Employer Sponsors
   d. Mandate
4. Access to Care
   a. Out of pocket spending, access data, ED use
5. Costs
   a. State Health Care Spending
   b. Private Health Care Spending
   c. Share Responsibility
6. Legal Challenges
   a. Keep this section as is  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masscare (talk • contribs) 14:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I 100% agree. I came to this article looking for information about the costs of Romneycare and I had to weed through every single section. Even then there was nothing coherent. This is an excellent new structure.--173.76.46.132 (talk) 05:18, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the problem is that at one time this was a fairly controversial reform in both Massachusetts and then nationally during the GOP primaries.  However, once implemented it became far less controversial and reverted to the level of interest one would normally expect out of insurance regulations (not that much)50.201.255.38 (talk) 13:55, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganize and update data 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Massachusetts health care reform. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928022319/http://www.thetranscript.com/headlines/ci_3706699 to http://www.thetranscript.com/headlines/ci_3706699
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:14, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a noticeboard discussion regarding the neutrality of 's edits to this article (Special:Diff/901904756/912699623) and other articles related to Medicaid estate recovery. If you're interested, please participate at . — Newslinger talk 17:16, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noticeboard discussion regarding {{np|NormSpier}}'s recent edits