Posted on 07/12/2009 5:36:29 PM PDT by Coleus
As a conservative, I have pretty much given up on the Republican Party after the big-spending, big-government Bush years. I am firmly in the corner of the one man who called the entire era correctly, and that is Ron Paul. However, of all the mainstream GOP hopefuls for the 2012 presidential nomination, I would say Mitt Romney is the most capable. But Mitt's got a problem. A big problem. And that's his health-care policy.
When Romney was governor of Massachusetts. he endorsed a health-insurance plan that is little different from the one now being pitched by the Democrats. That alone may end up disqualifying him for higher office, especially if the Democrats get their way and impose their health-insurance plan. This Wall Street Journal editorial shows why. The Massachusetts plan has two features prominent with liberal reformers: Community rating and guaranteed issue. Community rating means that everyone - sick and healthy, young and old - is thrown into the same pool and sold coverage at the same rate.
This is of course a great deal for older, sicker people and a horrible deal for younger, healthier people. Imagine a kid fresh out of college who makes $500 a week paying $200 a week for health insurance. Meanwhile for someone who's older and already has a health condition, that same $200 a week is a bargain. And thanks to guaranteed issue, the insurers have to sell that person a policy. That's the problem that the Massachusetts plan was supposed to solve. According to the editorial, here's what happened:
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.nj.com ...
And it’s the biggest disqualifier of them all!!!
There is another problem (one of many) that he’s got: The perception that, of late, only liberal zero’s come from my state. Dukakis, Kerry, The “Swimmer”, Deville... if you are gonna vote in for prez a liberal someone who was a gov (or Sinator) from MA, why not go for the real thing, anyways. I suspect (and suggest) the rest of the country take a respite, a good 20-30 years should do, before going back to the MA well. MA switched from R (repub) to R (rat), and perhaps could swing back... but it will take MANY years.
But he has nice hair!
Polls show that the Democrats are more trusted with Health Care so I’m not really sure how having implemented a private sector system hurts him. Are you saying we’d rather have a government care system?
Ping
Blaming Mitt for what is happening in Massachusetts in 2012 makes just as much sense as Hussein continually trying to blame Bush.
Mitt might have problems, but the state of the state he left years before (by 2012 it’ll be what—10 years?) won’t be among them.
Yes, I supported Mitt in the primaries.
The "community rating" feature is nowhere near the same thing as "mandatory" coverage. Auto insurance nationwide is mandatory, but everyone is definitely NOT thrown into the same pool. In other words the failure of the Mass program (if indeed it is a mess at all) is the "leftiness" of it, i.e. everyone the same.
Auto insurance is individually adjusted according to many factors, and has deductibles to both reduce cost and insure against furtive abuse. Yet is still entrpreneurally competitive.
The private health industry can do the same. HMO's are supposed to be doing that now, but still must cover indirectly the vast number of deadbeats (incl. illegals).
So:
1) Get trial lawyers totally out of malpractice interference, with policing through the medical and insurance industry.
2) Everybody must have health coverage of some sort, even if it is to be forcibly extracted from entitlements.
3) Let private providers set up the programs (e.g. deductibles and copay).
4) Encourage living wills (through the private incentives).
5) Protect private industry from "leftist" mandate, with insistence on individual responsibility.
6) Eliminate any treatment for illegals as they should be getting it at their resident nation. If they want American then come through the front door (existing immigration law) or go home.
Incidentally this latter concession is related to the globalist "communist" agenda, just like AGW. The progress of the world depends on the converse; the individual approaches, options, programs, creativity, and feedback of independent entities. Like the States of the United States.
Rahm Emmanuel is the ugliest, most bigoted politician in the Whitehouse in a long time.
LOL...your spelling “mistakes.”
Many of you may or may not know me. I have been a member for many years on here and am a staunch conservative (overall). But I have to say that health-care reform stinks, but not as bad as the current system. My wife spent six days in the hospital two weeks ago and the bill was $72,366.32 for kidney stones. Not cancer or anything too serious, just a couple CAT scans, minor surgery, and some pain meds. That is over $12,000 per day. Most Americans don’t earn 72K in a year. So tell me what the fix is? And when we controlled the house, senate, and the white house, we could have fixed it ourselves. So what gives?
Romney left office in January of 2007.
there are many factors that cost so much: medical specialists, nurse specialists, technology and fancy equipment, the cost of treating the uninsured and illegal aliens, insurance mandates, etc.
Two years. Ten years. What do we need to say to get Romney elected? We’ll say it! /sarc
Mitt should win 2012 nomination easily. Not my 1st choice, just stating reality.
What disturbs me is that we still have active posters who support this socialist B*munch.
I’ll be listening carefully when Mitt starts to (be forced to) address this, as the next campaign season rolls around. I don’t really fault him for giving the socialist voters of Massachusetts the socialist scheme they demanded — they were going to get it from him, or they were going to get it from somebody else. But he’ll lose my respect if he doesn’t honestly address the fact that it hasn’t helped contain costs or improve quality of care, or even substantially reduce the number of people who are uninsured.
Actually, I see a lot of positives in Mitt (mainly his strong private sector experience), but his hair always makes me cringe. I just can’t look at it without thinking of John Edwards.
I think he’s likely to get the nomination if he runs. But if Obama is riding high when late 2011/early 2012 rolls around, I can see Mitt deciding to stay out of the fray and wait until 2016. He doesn’t want the nomination; he wants the Presidency.
You don't like Cap & Trade? Too bad. McCain supported it.
TARP makes you want to tear your hair out? Too bad. McCain was one of the first, back in March, 2008, long before TARP, to call for bailouts.
When the Republican nominee supports so many liberal positions, the Democrats in Congress are emboldened, regardless of who wins. They can tell themselves We have a mandate in voting for (insert Liberal position here), since even the Republican guy was for this.
The Republicans in Congress tell themselves Hey, McCain won some states, and he did get a lot of votes, even though he had a pretty liberal agenda... yeah, it'll be ok if we trade our votes for (something from the Liberal agenda) for something we want down the line.
In 2012, it may be that Mitt Romney is the GOP's candidate, and it is a fact that he's not conservative or even slightly right of moderate.
It is a fact that Mitt Romney helped institute the mess that is socialized medicine which is going to bankrupt the state of Massachusetts eventually. It is a fact that Mitt Romney has been loudly and vocally pro-abortion. It is a fact that Mitt Romney has not been a friend to gun owners. It is a fact that Mitt Romney has nominated liberal judges to the bench.
Those facts will embolden the Democrats even more and push the GOP further to the left.
It isn't that a Republican candidate can't or shouldn't have one or two positions that deviate from the Right. People have different opinions and very few of us are internally consistent on every issue.
It's when many or most of the positions of candidates like McCain or Romney swerve left that the Republican party is dragged left with then.
Vote for Romney and rest assured that you are pushing the Republican party ever farther to the Left.
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.