From today’s Boston Globe:

Governor Mitt Romney signed most of a sweeping new healthcare bill into law yesterday at a festive Faneuil Hall ceremony hailed as a hallmark of bipartisan achievement, even as healthcare specialists expressed concern that the plan could start losing money in three years.
The bill will require all state residents to have health insurance by July 1, 2007, and require businesses with 11 or more workers to pay $295 per employee annually if the companies do not provide insurance. Romney vetoed the fee, but the Legislature is expected to override the veto.
In a moment widely praised as historic for the state and seen as a big boost to Romney’s presidential aspirations, the Republican governor basked in the credit and shared some, too, as he was joined by Democratic leaders of the Legislature and US Senator Edward M. Kennedy.
But amid the wide grins and handshakes, questions surfaced about the cost and the sweep of the legislation, which makes Massachusetts the first state to try to insure nearly all of its residents through an individual mandate to buy insurance.
A legislative staff analysis estimates that the groundbreaking healthcare plan would start losing money in two to three years, which could put pressure on lawmakers to spend more tax money, increase the fee on businesses or scale back the coverage of the sweeping bill. The analysis projects that the plan will be about $160 million short of its estimated cost of $1.56 billion in the fiscal year that starts July 1, 2008.
A number of economists and health policy specialists interviewed by the Globe said that the plan’s financing is solid for the next two years, especially since lawmakers have added a cushion of money in case of unexpected costs.
But some specialists warned that the picture is less certain after that. ”There are a lot of things that have to happen right for there to be enough money,” said John Holahan of the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan policy research organization in Washington, D.C.
Rising healthcare costs could easily outstrip the money raised by the bill through state and federal contributions and the employer assessment, observers said.
Some lawmakers, conceding they may have to revise the new law as it is implemented, said they are counting on a number of factors breaking their way for the plan to continue without more state spending, including being able to control medical costs and negotiate more federal aid.