[americanophile]

"So now, if Obamacare passes, Romney will be left telling angry primary voters that the only real difference between the two plans is that he implemented his policies at the state level, while Obama did it through the federal government. Sure, it's clearly worse if the federal government is implementing bad policies, but it's hard to see how such an argument would pass muster with anybody but those who are already ardent Romney supporters."

Well, I have to say this is totally wrong. While I don't like or support Massachusetts' health care system, and think it was a bad decision on Romney's part, to say that there's no difference between policy made on the federal level and policy made on the state level, even if they're substantially similar, is to completely undermine the notion of federalism - one of the fundamental conceptual and functional components of the republic and a key tenet of conservatism.

"The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government." -- James Madison

[VRWCmember]

While I don't like or support Massachusetts' health care system, and think it was a bad decision on Romney's part, to say that there's no difference between policy made on the federal level and policy made on the state level, even if they're substantially similar, is to completely undermine the notion of federalism - one of the fundamental conceptual and functional components of the republic and a key tenet of conservatism.

OTOH, to suggest that a governor who implemented at the state level the same type of behemoth government entitlement that Zero is trying to implement at the federal level will other than that govern conservatively is -at best - very naive.