.......The Wisconsin governor, who recently survived his recall election, said he is not going to implement the health care law right now.
“We’re going to wait. We said all along there was a legal step, there’s a political step and after each of those steps were exhausted we see what the future holds,” Walker said, noting that the election is crucial to the future of health care policy.
“The only chance to repeal that is to put in place a new president, a new Senate majority, and then ultimately repeal the law,” Walker said.
Walker said he “learned” from Romney’s example in Massachusetts: “In the case of Wisconsin, we learned looking at that state, Massachusetts is a good example, we learned from what we found from our actuarial assessment that we did this past year that it was not a good measure for the state of Wisconsin,” Walker said.
The governor added: “We think there’s two extremes - that the government mandate you have under ‘Obamacare’ ultimately is the only way you control health care costs not today but in the future, the ultimate way that would end up leading towards is rationing of health care. I don’t think that’s a good decision.” Walker said. “On the other end, I and plenty of other governors would like to go down the path of a free market solution that engages me and every other consumer of health care in being a more active participant in controlling our health, not just our health care costs.”.....
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57464544/gov-walker-we-learned-from-romney-on-health-care/
BTW Indiana has sent congress a bill for the cost of illegal aliens.....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2901656/posts
We stand with Arizona....how about you all!
smiles
Michelle Bachman has talked it through with a few of her collegues and they are recommending to all the states to withhold from implement the health care laws until the election and urge all the people of the states to email or text to their state governments urging them to do so.
Sometimes I get very frustrated that the people running Mitt Romney's campaign are not articulating the differences better than they are.
Unlike Barack Obama, Mitt Romney did not campaign on "Romneycare" when he was running for the office of Governor of Massachusetts. It was not until after he became Governor that Mitt Romney was more or less compelled to sign "Romneycare" into law when the Federal Government threatened to cut $385 million of Medicaid funding if the state did not reduce the number of uninsured recipients of health care services.
Given the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding states having the option to opt out of Medicaid expansion without being financially penalized, I have to wonder if this threat was likewise unconstitutional.
In any case, the law that came to be known as "Romneycare" was passed here in Massachusetts and everyone was required to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty which Romney didn't hesitate to call a tax.
If the "Romneycare" of today is not exactly the same as the original piece of legislation signed into law, it needs to be pointed out that Mitt Romney had to deal with a Democrat-controlled state legislature that overrode many of Mitt Romney's vetoes of additional "pork" they added to the law.
Romney sought to bring near-universal health insurance coverage to the state. This came after Staples founder Stemberg told him at the start of his term that doing so would be the best way he could help people, and after the federal government, owing to the rules of Medicaid funding, threatened to cut $385 million in those payments to Massachusetts if the state did not reduce the number of uninsured recipients of health care services.
Although he had not campaigned on the idea of universal health insurance, Romney decided that because people without insurance still received expensive health care, the money spent by the state for such care could be better used to subsidize insurance for the poor. After positing that any measure adopted not raise taxes ( apart from the tax penalty for non-compliance ) and not resemble the previous decade's failed "Hillarycare" proposal, Romney formed a team of consultants from diverse political backgrounds. Beginning in late 2004, they came up with a set of proposals more ambitious than an incremental one from the Massachusetts Senate and more acceptable to him than one from the Massachusetts House of Representatives that incorporated a new payroll tax.
In particular, Romney pushed for incorporating an individual mandate at the state level. Past rival Ted Kennedy, who had made universal health coverage his life's work and who, over time, had developed a warm relationship with Romney, gave the plan a positive reception, which encouraged Democratic legislators to cooperate. The effort eventually gained the support of all major stakeholders within the state, and Romney helped break a logjam between rival Democratic leaders in the legislature.
On April 12, 2006, the governor signed the resulting Massachusetts health reform law, commonly called "Romneycare", which requires nearly all Massachusetts residents to buy health insurance coverage or face escalating tax penalties, such as the loss of their personal income tax exemption. The bill also establishes means-tested state subsidies for people who do not have adequate employer insurance and whose income is below a threshold, with funds that were previously used to compensate for the health costs of the uninsured. He vetoed eight sections of the health care legislation, including a controversial $295-per-employee assessment on businesses that do not offer health insurance and provisions guaranteeing dental benefits to Medicaid recipients. The legislature overrode all eight vetoes, but the governor's office said the differences were not essential. The law was the first of its kind in the nation and became the signature achievement of Romney's term in office...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... __________________________________________________________
The essential differences between Romneycare and the Obamatax is this; namely that Romneycare merely sought to get citizens here in Massachusetts insured so that our hospitals wouldn't go bankrupt providing expensive healthcare to uninsured recipients - especially if a threatened Medicaid cut were implemented by the Federal Government.
Romneycare never envisioned a government takeover and control of 1/6 of our state's economy as Obamatax envisions a government takeover and control of 1/6 of our nation's economy.
I hope this helps people to better understand where Mitt Romney is coming from. Given the extremely liberal political atmosphere here in Massachusetts, Mitt Romney deserves a lot of credit for the way he got things done against less than perfect odds. I think he would be similarly able to get things done as President of the United States.