Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RomneyCare: Trying to Have It Both Ways
Human Events ^ | February.8, 2007 | Liz Mair

Posted on 02/08/2007 9:03:36 AM PST by Reagan Man

Less than a year ago, Mitt Romney boasted of his "success” in solving the problem of underinsurance in Massachusetts through the adoption of his controversial, but groundbreaking RomneyCare program. Today, he's disclaiming responsibility for the initiative's failings. Is it another case of flip-flopping on the part of the Rockefeller Republican-cum-supposed conservative?

Back in April, 2006, an op-ed ran in the Wall Street Journal. It was written by then-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and it was about a health care scheme that, from everything written in the op-ed, clearly was conceived by him and was considered by him to be a landmark achievement.

In that op-ed, Romney began by relating this story to readers:

"Only weeks after I was elected governor, Tom Stemberg, the founder and former CEO of Staples, stopped by my office. He told me, 'If you really want to help people, find a way to get everyone health insurance.' I replied that would mean raising taxes and a Clinton-style government takeover of health care. He insisted: 'You can find a way.'"

Romney followed on by commenting:

"When I took up Tom's challenge, I assembled a team from business, academia and government and asked them first to find out who was uninsured, and why," and "With private insurance finally affordable, I proposed that everyone must either purchase a product of their choice or demonstrate that they can pay for their own health care."

The emphasis that Romney placed in that op-ed on what has subsequently been dubbed RomneyCare as being his initiative, conceived by him and his team, cannot escape readers. Moreover, those who have discussed the program with Romney personally (and I am one of them) have been struck by his pride in what he obviously sees as his pet project.

So, why is it then that Romney is now saying that he cannot be held responsible for the program's success or failure? A Boston Globe article that ran on Saturday states that "former governor Mitt Romney has begun to distance himself from the new law and is suggesting that Democrats will be to blame if the plan falters," and "At recent political appearances, Romney has subtly lowered expectations for the law he championed as governor."

Could this be because even by last August, it was clear that RomneyCare would cost Massachusetts $151 million more, for 2007 alone, than Romney had said? Could it be because RomneyCare provided a $386 million rate increase to hospitals, doctors and managed care organizations -- a tab that federal taxpayers as well as Massachusetts taxpayers are expected to have to pick up? Could it be because the tab for covering low income individuals, just in RomneyCare's first year, will be $25 million more than planned? Could it be because the intended $250 a month average premiums that Romney described as "affordable" for the then-uninsured (and not just wealthy venture capitalists-cum-politicians) have now skyrocketed to an expected $380 per month, on average -- a distinctly unaffordable sum for many in Massachusetts who are now mandated to purchase them, lest they break the law?

In other words, could it be because Romney's "fiscally sound, market-based universal health care" initiative is yet another flawed, big government initiative with a hefty price tag -- and one that, now that crutiny of potential 2008 GOP Presidential nominees is increasing, is acting like a 20-ton weight on Romney's credibility as a good governance, fiscally conservative, limited government contender as opposed to a Michael Dukakis with an "R" behind his name?

I'll grant the governor that Democrats make a mess of most things, and making a mess of health care is their particular specialty -- so there is some reason to speculate that things might take a turn for the worse with Deval Patrick at the helm. But then the capacity for Democrats to pursue dumb health care policy is why some of us wondered exactly what could be so great about RomneyCare in the first place, given that Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, and FamiliesUSA were some of its biggest initial fans (more recently, the Service Employees International Union has also offered kind words for the plan).

Whereas before, Romney was touting the initiative as an example of his ability to deliver as a Republican who works with Democrats to get good things done, now he's making statements like "I was a little concerned at the signing ceremony when Ted Kennedy showed up."

Of course, I'm pleased that Romney has finally seen sense and recognized that, with Kennedy's persistent calls for the institution of socialized medicine as a top legislative priority for about 25 years now, he's not exactly the guy you want on your side on this particular issue. But given that only a few months ago, Romney was speaking so well of his own, Ted-approved program (and Romney never shied away from it being described as "his"), I find his newfound skepticism of that same program -- his -- on the basis of Democrat involvement a little less than convincing.

Suddenly, Romney is saying that the same Democrats who he managed to sell on his plan and work with to get it through the legislature are the ones who are going to fiddle with it and make it fail? Surely, if they had wanted a different plan in the first place, with their veto-proof majority, they could have pursued one last year. Instead, they signed up to what Romney wanted, and what Ted and Hillary endorsed, and Romney crowned himself the king of effective bipartisanship. Now, he's blaming his partners in crime for the demise of a program which he conceived, and which was fraught with difficulties, both practical and philosophical, from the get-go -- and of which, ironically, he still can't abandon pride (I'd sure hate to be his campaign manager).

After all, Romney is quoted in the Globe piece as saying "I'm proud of what we've done in Massachusetts" -- presumably meaning instituting a big government program defined by huge cost overruns, grossly inaccurate predictions of the average monthly insurance premium for an uninsured person (who is now compelled by Romney's law to purchase an expensive, Cadillac-style policy, due to Romney's non-pursuit of insurance regulation reform), and a constant prospect of increased taxes because the former two items were not predicted when the "no-new-taxes" RomneyCare model was put together.

The worst news of all? Romney also told the Globe that "if Massachusetts succeeds in implementing it [RomneyCare], then that will be a model for the nation." Lucky, lucky us...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: electionpresident; healthcare; rmthread; romney

1 posted on 02/08/2007 9:03:38 AM PST by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; cgk; sitetest; jla; Fierce Allegiance; NapkinUser; EternalVigilance; Spiff; dirtboy; ...

Romney 2008 PING


2 posted on 02/08/2007 9:04:41 AM PST by Reagan Man (Conservatives don't vote for liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MassachusettsGOP

*ping*


3 posted on 02/08/2007 9:13:20 AM PST by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
I heard him in an interview yesterday on the Lars Larson Show, he said that it was because the Legislature had attached a series of Mandates that were killing the success of the whole Plan. That if they wanted the thing to work, they were going to have to get rid of a LOT of those Mandates. He did not elaborate on what those Mandates were or why they were killing the plan. He did say, quite clearly, the Legislature added to it or changed it.
4 posted on 02/08/2007 9:21:17 AM PST by Danae (Anail nathrach, orth' bhais's bethad, do chel denmha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

People should not be surprised if Romney acts the politician, meaning waffler. His father, George was Governor of Michigan and was, I believe touted a Presdential material himself,many years ago. Mitt has said he has learned much from his mother (Lenore?), who ran for the Senate, back in the day.

I, for one, am getting a little tired of political dynasties, on both sides of the fence. I really do not think Romney will be any friend of conservatives and right now conservatives are in dire need of at least some friends in high places.


5 posted on 02/08/2007 9:25:27 AM PST by David Isaac (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

All moot IMO.

There is no way he gets the nomination, most likely will be Rudy.

AFAIC, Romney, Rudy, or Hillary are all the same so if I have to choose between Hillary and one of those RINO's, I'll stay home.


6 posted on 02/08/2007 9:41:11 AM PST by HEY4QDEMS (Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

Any article criticizing Romney's health care work in Massachussetts is disingenuous and misleading if it ignores the fact that the legislature made significant changes to Romney's plan. Romney vetoed large portions of the plan passed by the legislature; his vetoes were all overridden. There are honest arguments to be made on both sides of this issue, but that's the key: the debate must be honest. This article is not.


7 posted on 02/08/2007 9:46:33 AM PST by xjcsa (Ecotards annoy me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Danae; Reagan Man
"I heard him in an interview yesterday on the Lars Larson Show, he said that it was because the Legislature had attached a series of Mandates that were killing the success of the whole Plan. That if they wanted the thing to work, they were going to have to get rid of a LOT of those Mandates."

It's a fact that the ultra-liberal Legislature of Massachusetts made changes to the plan that Romney and the Heritage Foundation developed for MA, to the detriment of the plan.

For one example, the Legislature added a $295 fee per employee that employers must pay if they do not provide healthcare coverage for their employees which was not part of the original proposal. Gov. Romney vetoed that change, but the Legislature overrided his veto.

Screwing up good ideas is what Democrats do best.

8 posted on 02/08/2007 10:02:26 AM PST by Unmarked Package (Amazing surprises await us under cover of a humble exterior.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Danae

And he can't stop them now, because he is no longer Governor.

On the other hand, this shows the dangers of ANY government-sponsored solution, which is the ease at which a legislature can turn even a good plan (I'm not saying this is a good plan) into a bad one.


9 posted on 02/08/2007 10:29:23 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Unmarked Package
Gov. Romney vetoed that change, but the Legislature overrided his veto.

Screwing up good ideas is what Democrats do best

Seems as if Newt's proposed plan on his website is nearly identical to Romney's -- without the tweaking by the liberal, Democrat legislature.

Gingrich is willing to use the heavy hand of government to force consumers to take responsibility for their health, not just rely on coverage provided by employers. He favors national legislation similar to the law that Romney pushed through in Massachusetts, forcing individuals to buy health insurance just as they are required to purchase auto insurance though providing some government assistance to those who can't afford it

http://newt.org/backpage.asp?art=4017

10 posted on 02/08/2007 11:32:23 AM PST by redgirlinabluestate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

What????

Just last night the MittMen were telling me that RomneyCare gives free healthcare to ALL, and that it doens't cast taxpayers ANYTHING!?!?!?!

Excuse me while I resume rolling on the floor laughing...


11 posted on 02/08/2007 11:59:39 AM PST by EternalVigilance ("With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Please read post #10 carefully.

There's lots more where that came from.


12 posted on 02/08/2007 12:01:33 PM PST by EternalVigilance ("With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance; Jim Robinson; Amerigomag; ElkGroveDan; calcowgirl; tubebender; hedgetrimmer; ...
This is the same crappola Schwartzenegger is trying to shove down Cauleeforneeun's throats with glee!

With "CONservatives" like these... WHO NEEDS LIBERALS???

This is what just crack's me up!!! We keep gettin thrashed about the head and shoulders that we HAVE to support McCain, or Rudy, or Newt, or else we'll just automatically get Hitlery!!! Yet not one soul on FR can prove to any other soul that Hitlery won't stub her big fat toe in the nearly two years to go!!! (this was the same tired tirade that gave us Schwartzenfrauder here in CA!!!)

That's why, at this early stage, I'm supporting the most consistently conservative AND most electable candidate I can find. And for me... That's Duncan Hunter! Quality holds up over time!!!

13 posted on 02/08/2007 5:31:18 PM PST by SierraWasp (Grayout Davis, Gang-Green Schwartzenegger... Recycled Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown!!! Watch for it in 4!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp
"That's why, at this early stage, I'm supporting the most consistently conservative AND most electable candidate I can find. And for me... That's Duncan Hunter! Quality holds up over time!!!"

Until a better conservative choice comes along, Duncan Hunter is it.

14 posted on 02/08/2007 5:42:17 PM PST by Czar ( StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Wonder if Mitt's got a "burning in his bosom" on this one???

If you are wondering about "burning in his bosom", then you better check out the Mormon theology....

15 posted on 02/08/2007 5:56:51 PM PST by pointsal (q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Unmarked Package; xjcsa
Screwing up good ideas is what Democrats do best.

Opening the door to give them the opportunity in the name of bipartisanship is what RINOs do best.

16 posted on 02/08/2007 6:14:00 PM PST by Carry_Okie (Grovelnator Schwarzenkaiser: Making fascism fashionable in Kaleefornia, one charade at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Just last night the MittMen were telling me that RomneyCare gives free healthcare to ALL, and that it doens't cast taxpayers ANYTHING!?!?!?!

Excuse me while I resume rolling on the floor laughing...

What a load of crap. If you read the plan as proposed (before alteration by the Mass legislature) you would know that certain subsidies would be involved, assets shifted, etc. Behind every anti-Romney utterance you make is the hard-bigotry of anti-Mormonism. Reply all you want - I won't reply because you will demand that I apply all supposed Mormon sins to Romney.

17 posted on 02/08/2007 8:25:26 PM PST by torchthemummy (Progressive Collective Rights Mandates Regressive Individual Rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: torchthemummy
Behind every anti-Romney utterance you make is the hard-bigotry of anti-Mormonism.

I wondered when one of Romney's supporters would inevitably make such an unfounded and silly charge.

I've made no such religious reference. Ever.

But here's the kicker...you ready? My wife is LDS. And she is as opposed to Mitt as I am. Because he's a liberal.

Go jump in a lake. Salt Lake.

18 posted on 02/08/2007 9:08:33 PM PST by EternalVigilance ("With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson