Posted on 05/17/2011 5:29:19 AM PDT by IbJensen
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday, May 15, 2011, where he said he favors a "variation" on the individual insurance mandate. (AP Photo/NBC News, William B. Plowman)
(CNSNews.com) - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R.-Ga.) said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” yesterday that he supports requiring all individuals to buy health insurance, post a bond to pay for health care, "or in some way you indicate you're going to be held accountable"--a position he called a “variation” on the type of individual mandate included in President Barack Obama’s health-care reform law.
Led by Virginia and Florida, a majority of the states are backing lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of President Obama’s individual mandate in federal court. These states argue that the U.S. Constitution simply does not give the federal government the authority to order individual Americans to buy any good or service—something which, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal government in fact has never done.
On “Meet the Press” on Sunday, host David Gregory showed Gingrich a video clip from an appearance he made on the program on October 3, 1993. At that time, Congress was considering President Bill Clinton’s health-care reform proposal--which was never enacted. On that 1993 program, Gingrich said he favored the federal government requiring individuals to buy health insurance and then subsidizing individuals’ purchase of health insurance on a “sliding scale” determined by their income.
“I am for people, individuals--exactly like automobile insurance--individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance,” Gingrich said in 1993. “And I am prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals, on a sliding scale, a government subsidy so we insure that everyone as individuals have health insurance.”
In President Obama’s health-care law, individuals are required to buy health insurance and the federal government subsidizes the purchase—on a sliding scale—for individuals and families earning up to 400 percent of the poverty level.
On Sunday’s edition of “Meet the Press,” Gregory asked Gingrich if his position in 1993 wasn’t “precisely” what Obama enacted in 2010.
“No, it's not precisely what he did,” said Gingrich.
“In the first place,” the former House speaker explained, “Obama basically is trying to replace the entire insurance system, creating state exchanges, building a Washington-based model, creating a federal system. I believe all of us--and this is going to be a big debate--I believe all of us have a responsibility to help pay for health care. I think the idea that—“
Gregory interrupted at this point and asked if Gingrich agreed with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R.-Mass.) on the insurance mandate. Romney signed a health-care reform law when he was governor of Massachusetts that included a mandate on individuals to buy health insurance.
“Well, I agree that all of us have a responsibility to pay--help pay for health care,” said Gingrich. “And I think that there are ways to do it that make most libertarians relatively happy. I've said consistently we ought to have some requirement that you either have health insurance or you post a bond or in some way you indicate you're going to be held accountable.”
Gregory then asked: “But that is the individual mandate, is it not?”
Gingrich responded: “It's a variation on it.”
When asked whether he would use the individual mandate as an issue against Romney, Gingrich said: “No.”
Gingrich explained that his position was predicated on the belief that if the government did not require individuals to buy health insurance or post a bond, then other people would pay for those peoples’ health care.
“You know, there are an amazing number of people who think that they ought to be given health care,” said Gingrich. “And, and so a large number of the uninsured earn $75,000 or more a year, don't buy any health insurance because they want to buy a second house or a better car or go on vacation. Then you and I and everybody else ends up picking up for them. I don't think having a free rider system in health is any more appropriate than having a free rider system in any other part of our society.”
When a supposed conservative republican veers from liberty's course of course freedom loving Constitutionally based Americans will react in horror dusgust. Go away Newt.
“You know, there are an amazing number of people who think that they ought to be given health care,” said Gingrich. “And, and so a large number of the uninsured earn $75,000 or more a year, don't buy any health insurance because they want to buy a second house or a better car or go on vacation. Then you and I and everybody else ends up picking up for them. I don't think having a free rider system in health is any more appropriate than having a free rider system in any other part of our society.
Last I checked this person would get a bill from the hospital and then be required to pay such bill. If they don't then their credit is destroyed and there will never be a bigger house or new car. Then legal actions are taken so on and so forth.... the only people this doesn't apply to are illegal’s without a SSN! You actually want to MAKE everybody join just so you can "subsidize" the poor. You're a typical politician trying to sell Americans yet another form of wealth redistribution just so you can "subsidise" the poor.
He has high ambitions for a guy who divorced his first wife while she was undergoing chemo therapy cause he wanted to marry his misstress: was totally ineffectual during Clintons impeachment hearings, because he himself was having an affair with his own intern. So much for his character.
FUNG, you POS totalitarian-lite.
I think I've found the answer to Obama's lineage ... he's the bastard son of Gingrich and Romney.
So Gingrich is basically arguing the same thing he was arguing in 1993. So why is anyone surprised now? Gingrich is the same as he ever was.
I don’t know why this is such a surprise. He outlined this very program in his book that was published last year or the year before.
“There is an amazing number of people who think they should be given health care, said Gingrich”.
There is an amazing number of people who think they should be GIVEN a million dollars, a mansion, and a luxury car, too. You don’t make a overhauling policy that will devastate the economy (or what we have left) because people want to be GIVEN something. RINO, RINO, RINO, RINO, RINO, RINO, RINO, RINO.
He is already done before he even got started.
Newt is once again finding himself drowning in the deep end of the think tank. Smart guy, but he has many ideas and few answers. He has a troubling personal life which shows problems in loyalties (multiple marriages, multiple religions) and commitment. His positions on glow-bull-warming-climate-change are disturbing as much as his funky ideas on Obamacare-Lite.
Talk about out of touch! He certainly sealed his fate with this....
I have to defend Newt on this one point. There is a big difference in Obama-care: forcing even men to pay for health insurance that covers woman's reproductive tests and treatment's, forcing us to cover things we dont want or need, and Newt's position of forcing people to pay the hospital bill that the Federal Government forces them to en-cure by providing treatments to anyone. I dont see any Republicans proposing to lift the mandate on health providers to provide emergency treatment.
RE :” Last I checked this person would get a bill from the hospital and then be required to pay such bill. If they don't then their credit is destroyed and there will never be a bigger house or new car. “
Back to planet Earth. Many tens of millions of legal residents and citizens in this country have had their house for-closed and filed for bankruptsy. Why would they worry about paying a $80K health care bill they didnt anticipate? Those creditor's for the hospital have to get in a long line to wait for their money. Been to NV lately?
Forcing hospitals to provide free treatment was an early act of 'compassionate conservatism'. The Maryland state government imposes a special tax on us (yes me!) that do pay our hospital bills to reimburse the hospitals for those that dont pay theirs because they have no assets or insurance.
Gingrich to Gregory: “... but let me talk about ME ...”
Nice. We already have one in the WH. Really do not need to add another narcissist to our woes.
Gingrich thinks there is some straddle point between conservatism and liberalism that he can walk while garnering support from both. He truly is drowning in the deep end of the think tank. (Excellent image)
Interesting strategy. Going after the Democratic voters. Who needs them Republicans anyway?
I’ve said this many times and it is true. Given a choice between a liberal democrat and a ‘me-too’ republican the democrat will win almost every time.
Thanks for your work, FrankR FReeper. Well done.
I’ve got the same feeling about Dickface Newt as I did with McCain... their both quislings and conservatives will have no place to go. We must get behind either Michelle Bachmann or Herman Cain. And Palin needs to either get in or get behind one of these two people. Idiots like Ron Paul and pretenders like Dickface will suck up all the oxygen if we don’t get a true conservative out there.
That’s what I think, too.
I remember when Fred Thompson decided to delay getting into the race, and by the time he did, no one really cared.
Personally, I’m a Palin supporter, so I wish she’d come out and say she’s going to run. If she DOESN’T... wow. Are we screwed with a capitol “S,” as there’s NO ONE in our bullpen - either they’re not worth voting for under any circumstances, or they have 0% chance of winning (due to 0.001% name recognition among the general population).
I DON’T want to be faced with having to vote for Obama or Robo-candidate. I REALLY don’t. Held my nose once and voted for that crusty old loser McCain and WON’T do it again.
Same old story. The longer they live inside the Beltway, the more willing they become to spend taxpayer money and deny us our liberty.
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.