Mitt Romney Promotes/Defends Individual Mandate

[rubbadubbawubba]

[rubbadubbawubba]

[rubbadubbawubba]

Romney pushed for individual mandate in Massachusetts health care law, emails show



Tue, Jun 5, 2012 http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romn ... 54113.html

Mitt Romney has distanced himself from the health care reform bill he signed as governor of Massachusetts amid criticism that the law bears more than a passing resemblance to Obamacare, which he's repeatedly pledged to repeal if elected in November.

But a series of emails obtained by the Wall Street Journal reveals Romney was actively engaged in negotiating the specifics of the 2006 Massachusetts bill and that he and his top aides championed a provision identical to one in President Barack Obama's law requiring individuals to have or buy health insurance.

The so-called individual mandate is at the heart of most conservative criticism of Obama's health care law, with many Republicans calling the provision unconstitutional. But in 2006, emails obtained by the Journal under a public records request show, Romney and his top aides pressed for an individual mandate even when Massachusetts Democrats weren't yet embracing such a proposal.

According to the emails, Romney personally drafted a Wall Street Journal op-ed that defended the individual mandate. Romney's draft, slightly different from the final version that was published, insisted taxpayers ultimately foot the bill when the uninsured seek health care—an argument that has been echoed by the White House in defending Obama's bill.

"Either the individual pays or the taxpayers pay. A free ride on government is not libertarian," the published op-ed said.

But according to a draft obtained by the Journal, Romney went one step further, arguing, "An uninsured libertarian might counter that he could refuse the free care, but under law, that is impossible—and inhumane."

Romney has defended the Massachusetts law by arguing that he did the right thing for his state. In campaigning for a repeal of Obama's law, Romney has rejected the "one size fits all" approach and argued that it should be up to individual states to determine how to handle health care coverage.

But Romney has said very little about the individual mandate. A Wall Street Journal op-ed published in March 2011 called him "compromised and not credible" because of his support of the mandate in Massachusetts and described him as "Obama's running mate." In a subsequent letter to the editor, Romney defended the bill, but did not specifically respond to the paper's argument that his support of the mandate was a violation of conservative principals.

Romney's campaign did not respond to a request for comment about the emails.

[memphisdonna29]

He is evolving?


Or does that only work for Obama?

[rubbadubbawubba]

@ evolving. . .

That's like callin' outsourcing off-shoring. . .lol

[AmethystCavern]

Nahhh.

No evolution there.

He's still a monkey...

[memphisdonna29]

@ evolving. . .

That's like callin' outsourcing off-shoring. . .lol

Yeah, I thought it was equally silly when Obama used the term. Difference is Democrats bought it from him.

[memphisdonna29]

Nahhh.

No evolution there.

He's still a monkey...

Is Obama still a monkey?

[moldman7n]

@ evolving. . .

That's like callin' outsourcing off-shoring. . .lol

Yeah, I thought it was equally silly when Obama used the term. Difference is Democrats bought it from him.

We all know how bright THEY are.

[rubbadubbawubba]

[moldman7n]

[rubbadubbawubba]

[rubbadubbawubba]

Obamacare & Romneycare Are ‘The Same Fucking Bill’ Says Former Romney Adviser



November 16, 2011-TMP

You know it; I know it; probably a stranded Martian hiding under a rock in Somalia knows it: Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts healthcare reforms were the intellectual underpinning for the policy Republicans now deride as “Obamacare.” It’s been the albatross around the former governor’s neck ever since he entered the 2012 race, with even President Obama acknowledging its origins.

The GOP frontrunner has put up a valiant effort to claim there are major differences. That hasn’t always prompted a happy reaction from the less partisan advisers who helped him craft the law he’s now running away from.

Foremost among that group of disgruntled wonks is MIT professor Jonathan Gruber. He’s come out in the past saying it’s “sad” that Romney is running from his signature achievement, but now he’s turned things up to eleven.

In an interview with Capital New York, a “frustrated” Gruber vents about the possibility of the bill’s key component - the so-called individual mandate - being ripped out of it by the Supreme Court.

The interview is worth reading in full, but here’s the key passage regarding Romney:

He credited Mitt Romney for not totally disavowing the Massachusetts bill during his presidential campaign, but said Romney’s attempt to distinguish between Obama’s bill and his own is disingenuous.

“The problem is there is no way to say that,” Gruber said. “Because they’re the same fucking bill. He just can’t have his cake and eat it too. Basically, you know, it’s the same bill. He can try to draw distinctions and stuff, but he’s just lying.”

Gruber is a passionate defender of the bill he helped create, even going to the extent of writing a graphic novel to help dispel the misconceptions that sprang up even before Sarah Palin uttered the fateful words, “death panel.” In the interview he doubts the good intentions of those trying to dismantle the bill, saying, “Look, if this succeeds, then Obama becomes F.D.R.” So if it does wind up being gutted it will be “on purely political grounds.”

[AmethystCavern]

he’s just lying

bennie bears repeating

[rubbadubbawubba]

*swipe*. . .lol. .

[moldman7n]