One the weirdest delusions nursed by advocates of “universal coverage” is their belief that a state decree requiring everyone to buy insurance will solve the uninsured problem.  Like so many ideologically-driven fantasies, this delusion has not been treated well by the world of objective fact.

Exhibit A in the case against mandated universal coverage is the Massachusetts meltdown. The public has been subjected to an enormous amount of propaganda about Romneycare, but the fact is that it began disintegrating as soon as it came in contact with the real world. As Sally Pipes puts it:

Romney’s Massachusetts plan has been troubled from the start, performing particularly well with members of the media but less well with the premium-paying public. Universal coverage was jettisoned almost at the outset, when officials accepted the argument that the plans were not affordable for 20 percent of the uninsured.

And just weeks before go-live, the situation has not improved. Michael Tanner points that out at the Cato blog:

The latest reports from Massachusetts warn that with just seven weeks left until the state’s mandate for individual health insurance goes into effect, more than 100,000 residents have failed to buy the required insurance. That represents nearly 20 percent of the state’s uninsured population and more than half of the uninsured with incomes too high to qualify for subsidies.

No matter how many lame excuses are offered up by advocates masquerading as policy analysts, the Massachusetts experiment is failing because it’s a bad idea that ignores the basic laws of economics.