Actually, Romney has an argument: Obamacare requires the abuse of the Commerce Clause in unprecedented ways (by month’s end he may be able to say it was unconstitutional with the backing of a SCOTUS ruling), while Romneycare was within the powers reserved to the states and the people by the 10th Amendment. Trot out the states as the laboratories of democracy trope. “In left-leaning Massachusetts where people are comfortable with government economic intervention and expect lots of government services,” Romney can say, “we tried one approach. Other states should be free to try other approaches to health care reform, not have a heavy-handed version of what we tried in Massachusetts imposed on them from Washington.”
I expect the reason he’s not making the argument is that he’s waiting on SCOTUS to rule, since the details of how he argues it will differ depending on what the ruling is.
Actually, Romney has an argument: Obamacare requires the abuse of the Commerce Clause in unprecedented ways (by month’s end he may be able to say it was unconstitutional with the backing of a SCOTUS ruling), while Romneycare was within the powers reserved to the states and the people by the 10th Amendment. Trot out the states as the laboratories of democracy trope. “In left-leaning Massachusetts where people are comfortable with government economic intervention and expect lots of government services,” Romney can say, “we tried one approach. Other states should be free to try other approaches to health care reform, not have a heavy-handed version of what we tried in Massachusetts imposed on them from Washington.”He has another argument that he has already at least mentioned in one or two of the early Republican Primary debates: RomneyCare is 2 pages. ObamaCare is 2300 pages.
That's a big freaking difference. Anyone can read RomneyCare and see what's in it. No one can read ObamaCare and understand what it will do.
No one.