Romney Talks Immigration, Health Care

AP ^ | 11/18/2007 | By KEN RITTER

[Jim Robinson]

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney anticipated questions about health care when he called on a friendly Nevada business group Friday. It was the question on immigration that surprised him.

"I didn't expect that to be ... a major concern of the chamber," the former private equity businessman and Massachusetts governor said after giving his stump speech and taking four questions from a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce round-table.

"But it's a concern across the country," Romney said. "People are tired of all the talk and lack of action to stop illegal immigration."

Immigration is a major concern for businesses nationwide as they deal with the fallout if they hire employees who are in the country illegally.

Romney said he favors issuing employment verification cards to legal immigrants "with their name, their number, their picture" and "biometric information."

~~snip~~

The Democratic National Committee responded in a statement that Romney "refuses to offer clear plans on the war in Iraq, health care or immigration reform."

Romney, who gained national prominence guiding the 2002 Winter Olympics in Utah, was the first to take the offer. He used it to espouse his core beliefs and seek backing from individual members.

He summarized his Massachusetts health law as a way to force those who can afford private health insurance to sign up, while helping low-income people pay their premiums.

"My plan said this," Romney said: "Now that we got the rates down so they're more affordable ... either buy a health care policy or pay your own way at the hospital. But no more showing up expecting free care from the government or from the hospital."

Romney's rivals gleefully pointed out this week that Massachusetts residents had to sign up by Thursday or they likely would face tax penalties starting Jan. 1.

[expatguy]

My recent observations visiting Houston. What is happening to my country?

The Balkanization of America

[AmericanInTokyo]

The "negative" template for me, and perhaps a lot of us around here on FR, is none other than George W. Bush in 2000 and again in 2004.

Thinking we would at least get some acceptable level of conservatism, and scared of the alternatives of Al Gore and John Kerry, we got PC/Socialism, International Appeasement and Wide Open Borders/Mass Scale Invasion anyway.

Been there. Done that.

Won't be fooled again so easily if there is a third alternative.

[Rockitz]

I’ve got the dual “negative” template that also includes Arnold, so I hear ya.

[barnicus]

I agree. There were lots of negatives with bush. But I look at Alito and Roberts. These are 2 major accomplishments with Bush in the White House.

That said, Bush is no conservative. Voting for Mitt or Rudy or McCain would be the equivalent to voting for Bush for a 3rd term. We don't need a Republican. We need a Conservative.

[AmericanInTokyo]

I will agree on Alito and Roberts. That is about it. But granted, important decisions and important impact.