tate voters rejected an attempt to overhaul the state's health care system yesterday, defeating Question 5.
If approved, the question would have made Massachusetts the only state in the country with guaranteed health care coverage. But opponents insisted it was too radical and would put a ''wrecking ball'' to the state's health care system.
''This was the wrong way to address the state's health care issues,'' said Ricahrd C. Lord, president of Associated Industries of Massachusetts, which helped coordinate opposition to Question 5.
Key to the defeat was the more than $3 million advertising campaign run by local HMOs. Question 5's supporters, in conceding, said they were simply outgunned.
''The important thing to take away from this is that a campaign who ran a $50,000 operation came just about even with a $5 million operation,'' said Andre Guillemin, campaign director for Yes on 5. ''We believe that the ... voters did a wonderful job in realizing the benefits that Question 5 would bring to them.
The No on 5 forces declared victory at about 11 p.m. As late as this week, however, it appeared Question 5 would pass. Polls taken before Election Day showed Question 5 had 50 percent support, with 25 percent against and 25 undecided.
If passed, Question 5 would have required the Legislature to enact universal health coverage by July 2002. It also would have established a stringent set of HMO controls, including a requirement that HMOs spend no more than 10 percent of their revenues on administrative costs and executives' salaries. A temporary ban on the entry of for-profit health care companies into Massachusetts also would have gone into effect.
The question's backers argued that only a dramatic overhaul of the health care system could lessen the harmful effects of financial pressures on medicine.
Opponents of Question 5 argued that it would have so disrupted the system that HMOs would face financial crisis, the state goverment would be hit with huge health bills, premiums would skyrocket, and more people than ever would ultimately be without insurance.
The two sides' victory parties yesterday reflected the funding difference between them. The HMO-driven No on 5 group celebrated in the Top of the Hub restaurant atop the Prudential Tower, while Yes on 5 gathered at a house in Boston.
