A brilliant, if annoying health policy researcher has posted a reply to Paul Krugman's column in this morning's New York Times....
He points out that Krugman makes over-optimistic assumtions about the the effectiveness of a "Clinton-type" mandate plan.
Money quote:
In his policy simulations, [the paper Krugman cites] assumes that "95% of those would not voluntarily choose to insure are forced to insure through the mandate." This is not the Clinton plan. It is not even a "Clinton-type plan" ... Almost by definition, a near-perfect mandate will increase the number of people covered under any proposed health plan. Whether this nation actually would support such stringent policies is another matter. Here you presume precisely what is most in doubt.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...