Just because obama is a failure, doesn't mean that America has to be one too.
Posted on 05/30/2011 8:12:19 AM PDT by Fractal Trader
In late spring 2005, Mitt Romney gathered with a dozen top policy and political advisers in a conference room near the governor’s suite on the third floor of the State House.
For two years, they had grappled with the abstruse complexities of health care reform, sifting data, evaluating input from experts, and testing theories to craft a plan that would expand coverage to nearly everyone in the state and not break the bank.
This was a bold move for a first-term Republican governor, some of whose more conservative advisers doubted the wisdom of a foray deep into policy turf long dominated by Democrats. One privately called the idea Dukakis II, a reference to the 1988 Democratic-led effort by Governor Michael S. Dukakis to phase in near-universal coverage — even though Romney’s approach was fundamentally different.
But Romney was resolute in pushing forward. And on the table this day was a critical decision that would, in many ways, define the plan, and also Romney’s political ambitions, wherever they would lead him.
The question: Should adults with sufficient income be required to buy basic health insurance or pay a penalty if they refuse?
It was in many ways a conservative notion, grounded in personal responsibility, and Romney was drawn to it. At the roundtable meeting, he pressed the is sue, challenging his advisers.
“Everybody in the room was very aware it was a novel approach and that it had repercussions in Massachusetts,’’ recalled Timothy R. Murphy, who was Romney’s point man on the legislation. “I don’t think it was lost on anyone that Mitt had an emerging national profile, but there weren’t many of us thinking there would be a national debate on this.’’
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
For what it's worth, when Romney was governor, the legislature was so stacked against him that he could not sustain a veto. To indicate that he had a strong role in shaping Romneycare is to ignore the facts in the matter. Overall, he played a very limited roll in getting the bill passed. However, he was an enthusiastic proponent of the bill.
“It was in many ways a conservative notion, grounded in personal responsibility, and Romney was drawn to it.”
I think we have a different definition of conservative.
Your take on this subject is absolutely correct. The GOP would have to nuts to nominate Mitt Romney for POTUS period. It would be McCain all over again, only worse. Romney is the weakest candidate in the field.
Your points are true, but such a move and such a candidate is wholly consistent with voodoo Republican magical thinking.
For what it’s worth, I’m looking forward to seeing him politically humiliated long before the primaries.
This time, we, the Conservatives have the candidates, the fire in the belly, the votes to effectively dismantle “The Republican Establishment”. This is a must, if the USA is to survive. Then, down with Obama and the entire “Socialist” Democrat party!!! If we fail this time, we will all see an America that we no longer like, prosper or be free in!!! The sooner we all come together is this “must happen” quest for the future of America and our children, the better off we all will be!!!
All they had to do was let there be MORE competition.
Walmart with the Hospitals.
Out of state insurance companies to compete at last.
BUT NO.
Romney is a lawyer.
And lawyers do not care about HEALTH CARE as do doctors.
So Romney IMPOSED RomneyCARE (and the results
which the Boston Globe and Romney ignore).
"I know this is going to get a lot of conversation," he said, "but the health of the people in Massachusetts is more important to me than the health of my political prospects."
Go to hell, Romney!
FUMR!
Breaking news? Seriously?
Evidently....
GFYMR!
I recognize Myth and the Swimmer...who are the other boobs?
No excuse. He should have vetoed and allowed the Dems to override it. Being a supporter of it and his supporters saying he might as well have signed it because the Dems would have gotten it made into law anyways, is no excuse for standing up and fighting to do the right thing.
It was in many ways a conservative notion, grounded in personal responsibility
Bravo sierra. There is NOTHING conservative about the government foisting their idea of personal responsibility on anyone. That's why it's called personal responsibility. Duh.
I don’t get it.
Me neither...
And on that subject isn't it lovely that Nancy's "constituents (DONORS)" are exempt?
We have to read the bill before we pass it.
Romney is a joke and if he gets the nomination I won't vote. And that is why the democrats are pushing Romney because any conservative with half a brain realizes he is a limousine liberal.
Can someone photo shop Romney in standing out of a sunroof in a limo, then put a giant Rino in front of the limo with a doctor smock on? That should be required in every Romney thread.
Sarah needs to make it official, get the donors and prove that Romney's millions is nothing compared to hard working grassroots fundraising.
They probably are czars in the Obama White House.
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.