Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Mitt Romney outlines his health care priorities in a USA Today opinion piece and I am conflicted. On the one hand, how can a conservative argue with the following?
My plan is to harness the power of markets to drive positive change in health insurance and health care. And we can do so with state flexibility (unlike ObamaCare's top-down federal approach), no new taxes (as opposed to hundreds of billions of dollars of new taxes under ObamaCare), and better consumer choice (as opposed to bureaucratic, government choice under ObamaCare). This change of direction offers our best hope of preserving both innovation and value.
If I am elected president, I will issue on my first day in office an executive order paving the way for waivers from ObamaCare for all 50 states. Subsequently, I will call on Congress to fully repeal ObamaCare.
But what of the protean former governor’s own version of ObamaCare, enacted with his backing five years ago in Massachusetts to disastrous effect? Mitt makes it a feature, smoothly eliding RomneyCare into a laboratory-of-democracy mélange of fifty states free to experiment with disparate public health care policies, even ones as stupid and counter-productive as his own prescription. Giving Romney his due, I suppose even failed experiments have value.
Give states the responsibility, flexibility and resources to care for citizens who are poor, uninsured or chronically ill. This reform speaks to the central advantage of our federalist system — that different states will experiment with and settle on the solutions that suit their residents best. Some states might pass a plan like the one we did in Massachusetts, while others will choose an altogether different route.
Put me down for “altogether different.”
So is Mitt Romney paradoxically a stronger candidate because Romneycare hangs over his head like a Sword of Damocles, an ever-present reminder of his commitment to rip up Obamacare root and branch? Or is Mitt’s federalism argument a convenient dodge that allows President Obama to eviscerate the Republican position merely by pointing out that Romney has never disowned his own very similar approach to providing universal coverage?
- Comment (29)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
May '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
As I wrote in the other thread (and because I want to seen as a pudit), Romney will begin to show how:
--at worst, "Romneycare" hasn't put MA in any worse a situation than other similarly-situated states;
--he prevent MA from doing way worse things, i.e., single payer; and
--in reality, "Romneycare" amounts to little more than an additional income tax you can get out of by having health insurance if you can afford it.
If, over time he can do these things persusively, he's gone from "lose" to draw on the issue. Then he can win on other the other issues.
Jun '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Put me down for “altogether different.” Very funny, George. I resemble that remark. It was pointed out by Larry Kudlow the other day that Massachusetts has the highest health premiums in the nation now and the wait to see one's general physician has increased to 43 days on average. I don't know if that State could have done any worse had they tried. But......with 50 States working on their own methods, one of them is bound to hit the jackpot. At least Mass has proven with unbounding clarity what doesn't work. Of course that is no doubt why the Democrats are so hell bent on repeating it.
May '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
This is his last chance to perform a double backflip with a triple twist to disavow Romneycare. And it looks like he is not going to try.
Jul '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Blah, blah, blah...flannel mouth....waffle...
Fact is, you're never gonna get the Federal government out of healthcare until you drive a stake through the heart of Medicare.
Aug '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
I thought Mitt's plan made sense except for the "innovation grants" in step 4. We don't need no stinkin' grants to inact tort reform.
Some of you may feel that Romney is trying to thread the needle with this approach but I don't see another viable course he could take. For him to say that Romneycare was an utter failure - as some Ricochetians would like - would make him look like an idiot.
He should probably speak more to the bad changes the Dem legislature made in his plan and may well do so in furture speeches, debates, etc but at the end of the day he's got to finess Romneycare as best he can - it's his only option at this point.
I think he's wise to get the Romneycare/Obamacare issue out of the way early so he can focus on job creation and economic growth which are his strong points anyway.
Aug '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Leveling the playing field by stating that you have made mistakes ,as your future opponent has, is sort of disarming,isn't it ?
I think the problem may be one of navel gazing, we are all feeling so helpless that we look for some forceful avatar of change. Doesn't the power still remain within our collective grasp ?
Time to drop the woolen costume. Flannel is made from cotton isn't it ?
Edited on May 12, 2011 at 1:25amNov '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
George Savage
Mitt Romney outlines his health care priorities in a USA Today opinion piece :
Giving Romney his due, I suppose even failed experiments have value.
Agree with all of the above! Thanks for a well-balanced presentation of opinion.
Jul '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
On the other hand, it would be the truth.
Failure is an important lesson. Perhaps Mittens can instruct the voters in such a regard.
Jun '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
George Savage
So is Mitt Romney paradoxically a stronger candidate because Romneycare hangs over his head like a Sword of Damocles, an ever-present reminder of his commitment to rip up Obamacare root and branch? Or is Mitt’s federalism argument a convenient dodge that allows President Obama to eviscerate the Republican position merely by pointing out that Romney has never disowned his own very similar approach to providing universal coverage? ·
As a Romney supporter last time around, his statement gives me some comfort, but I don't think I can get back on board until he can admit that he made a mistake with Romneycare. Other than opening him up to criticism that he's admitted to making a bad decision a few years ago, I don't see the downside for him.
In the meantime, I'm keeping my powder dry. My list of potentials includes Romney, Daniels, Pawlenty (Christie and Ryan would appeal to me as well, although Christie would need to move further right on gun control and a couple of other issues). Cain interests me, but he's an outside shot.
I'm definitely not for Huckabee, Palin (though I like her), or Gingrich.
Edited on May 12, 2011 at 3:46amMay '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Romney has a point in that no one is forcing the citizens of Massachusetts to keep what they have (or rather, to keep legislators and a Governor to keep what they have). They haven't repealed it; are they stupid? Are you suggesting a form of conservative statism that says each state is too stupid not to decide what it wants? As I said, DRAW.
Aug '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Michael Tee
On the other hand, it would be the truth.
Michael,
You are engaging in a vast oversimplification of a complex issue. You are also abusing the benefit of hindsite (granted you are not alone in this abuse).
Many like to conveniently forget that none other than the Heritage Foundation supported Romneycare in its original form. Whether political theory is from the Left or Right it is still just theory and not completely transferable to the real world.
Politics is indeed like making sausage in that a whole lot of unsitely parts are needed to make the final product. Let's face it, Romneycare was probably the best healthcare reform possible in a liberal state like MA. In fact, a recent poll showed that 85% of MA residents were happy with it!
Not your cup of tea or mine to be sure but I believe neither of us live in MA...
Nov '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Romney in the White House + Ryan in the House + Rubio in the Senate = the ultimate pro-capitalist, pro-business hat trick.
Edited on May 12, 2011 at 3:02amApr '11
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
If Obamacare were popular and he was mostly concerned about the Republican primaries rather than the general election, this might be a decent strategy. But Obamacare is not popular. And I suspect it is because it is bad policy and not simply that it is unconstitutional. And the core of that is the individual mandate. I don't think he can defend Romneycare and simultaneously articulate why the individual mandate is bad from an economic and personal liberty standpoint. I think that puts him at a serious disadvantage in the Republican field, if it doesn't put a target on him for the other candidates.
Arguing for federalism works when your policy is a model, not a cautionary tale you won't disavow.
Dec '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
There's a universal law that says that anything is easier to get into than out of. Because of the inertia of government, it's very difficult to undo a major mistake of the scale of RomneyCare. It doesn't speak to Romney's judgment or skill as a management systems expert for him to have allowed that system to take root, unable to foresee how badly it would distort the Massachusetts health care system.
Dec '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
George Savage
. Giving Romney his due, I suppose even failed experiments have value.
As Thomas Edison taught us, failed experiments have great value because they are the only road to experiments that work. But Edison also taught that failed experiments only have value if the experimenter is willing and able to recognize failure quickly, learn from it and move on to another experiment designed to take advantage of what he learned from his accumulated failures.
Romney shows no sign that he recognizes that the policy to which his name has become attached is in fact a colossal failure. It would sure be helpful to the other 49 states, for instance, to be told in no uncertain terms that the RomneyCare approach is worse than useless, so they can learn from it without repeating the same failure.
May '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
I"m still trying to figure out this notion that the only thing holding back Romney as a viable candidate is RomneyCare. Need I bring up the Ted Kennedy debate? Romney's main flaw is the perception of him. He gives the impression on the one hand of an unprincipled political opportunist and on the other of a managerial technocrat. He's had ample time to convince people that he's neither, and hasn't done it effectively.
I'm with professor Rahe on his prediction. I think Romney's path to victory in the primaries is dependent on him positioning himself as the lesser evil amongst the uninspiring retreads. If anyone viable enters the race (or rises unexpectedly from the currently declared crop), Romney will spend lots of money just to fall into irrelevance.
Apr '11
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Can someone explain why Romney is considered a serious candidate when he governed Massachusetts for 4 years and his signature achievement is a demonstrable failure (see tomorrow's editorial in the WSJ), while Sarah Palin is not considered serious despite successes in political and energy infrastructure reforms in her two years? She left early, but had in place a fellow conservative Republican to succeed her, while Romney was the last in two decades of Republican governors of Massachusetts.
Yes, failure can have value. But in politics, maybe unlike science, the people responsible for the failure generally don't receive a promotion.
Jun '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
I supported Romney in 2008 and I agree with the idea of 50 states competing for the best approach to healthcare. But Romney needs to explain why Romneycare ended up having similarities with Obamacare and why he didn't (couldn't?) pass market oriented reforms and maybe a little tort reform. His problem is his past defense of Romneycare. If he had emphasized that there are limits to what a conservatives can achieve in MA with a Democrat legislature and how the plan he passed was better (or the least bad) viable alternative in MA, he would be in a better position now. I believe Romney's desire to repeal Obamacare, but we need a better explanation of Romneycare. To be convincing this explanation may need to include some admission that he has learned the lesson that compromising with the Left is dangerous because it is terribly hard to reverse the expansion of government power.
Edited on May 12, 2011 at 5:42amSep '10
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Romney is the candidate with the 50's tailfins and Eisenhoweresque patina trying to convince you that this time he's different.
Re: Romney on Healthcare: Leave it to the States
Listening to the Steyn/Goldberg/Long podcast on the drive home just now, I am persuaded by our commentators that Romney is "authentically inauthentic": an ideal man to play a presidential candidate.
Edited on May 12, 2011 at 7:10am