Today's Wall Street Journal (subscription required) describes some of the deliberations of the Connector board, the group charged with working out many of the details of the Massachusetts health care plan.

The plan includes a provision that individuals who don't have insurance will be subject to a fine of $1,000. But there is also a provision that people at the lower end of the income spectrum won't have to pay the fine. So one of the questions faced by the board was "What is an affordable price?"

In April, the board set upon making its final major policy decision, and once again it was divided. At issue was how many residents could afford the premiums the Connector had negotiated with private insurance companies. The cheapest plan was $175 a month for those in their late-30s. Could most residents afford that? The answer was critical because those deemed too poor to pay wouldn't be penalized for failing to purchase insurance.

Dr. Gruber, who calls himself the "Grinch," took a tough line, arguing that most people could afford the premium and saying it was important that almost everyone be required to have insurance. "I dared to say the poor people can afford to pay for health insurance," he says. Board member Lou Malzone, manager of a union health plan, disagreed. "In Massachusetts, you have to make $30[000] or $40,000 a year just to survive," he said.

Advocates for increased socialism argued that even a family of three with an income of $85,000 could not afford the insurance. Some can, of course, and some can't--or choose not to. Wherever one draws the line, the point is that the line is being drawn. By law, the state is substituting the wisdom of politicians (or in this case, a group of people appointed by politicians) for the judgment of ordinary people as to what they can and cannot afford.