[ejonesie22]

Again, nice try, but that horse has been run and beat here numerous times in the past 2 years alone If the likes of Begala and Carville like a plan and speak of it highly then, well...

And also I have this from my old cut and paste file, the shared points between the two:

They both require that individuals obtain insurance and also require employers provide it.
They both provide government subsidies for those with low incomes.
Both expand the number of people covered under Medicaid.

There were others I never bothered saving since they were oft repeated here.

So again, good effort, but the facts have supported a much different conclusion.

[curiosity]

They both require that individuals obtain insurance also require employers provide it.

Not true. Hillarycare put the mandate on employers. Romeny's plan put the mandate on individuals. There is no employer mandate in Romney's plan. That's a major difference.

Hillarycare had the government dictate the coverage employers were to provide and the premiums to be charged.

Romney's plan requires a miminum level of catastrphic coverage for individuals. Beyond that, individuals have a lot of choice (deductible, out-of-pocket-maximum, co-pay, etc). It also allows insurance companies to set whatever premiums they want and to compete.

If you can't see that's a fundamental difference, there's no helping you.

They both provide government subsidies for those with low incomes.

That's true. The similarities pretty much end there.

Another major difference you fail to note, Romeny's plan involved no price controls on medical services. Hillarycare had massive ones.