Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
I am absolutely stunned by the content of this video of Mitt Romney, the latest from Andrew Kaczynski. It is not from 2006, not from 2002, not from 1994, not from some campaign of yore when he was appealing to a different audience. It is from just last year, in reaction to President Obama's health care law. Romney says: "I hope we're ultimately able to eliminate some of the differences, and repeal the bad and keep the good."
A couple of notes:
Romney applauds the "incentives" to purchase insurance in Obamacare, which he says "works." This, of course, refers to the individual mandate. The "incentive" is a fine.
Romney also inaccurately describes why his exchange functions - again leaving out the taxpayer funded subsidies which are inevitably redistributed from other taxpayers. Of the 412,000 people added to the insurance rolls in Massachusetts since 2006, only 7,000 of them have coverage not subsidized in whole or in part by the taxpayers.
Romney says that the "rates are lower than they otherwise would be" according to this. That's an item for further debate, but premium rates in Massachusetts are the highest in the nation and double the national average. They have increased dramatically since his plan passed - he really believes they would be even higher without it?
Romney claims that he opposes the aspect of Obamacare that will determine pricing of premiums - this is a bit of an inaccurate description, but even so, how does this not conflict with exactly the same policy approach in Massachusetts today, an inevitable result of his law?
In all, this is a very disturbing video given how recent it is. Considering that this follows on Philip Klein's discovery that Romney plans to use a waiver method for the states which does not kick in until 2017, and leaves much of Obamacare intact, my concerns about Romney's intentions have never been higher.
At the very least, Romney must explain to us what he means by "repeal the bad and keep the good."
UPDATE: Philip Klein points out to me that this was consistent with what Romney was reportedly saying elsewhere at the time in 2010 - that he would repeal "the worst aspects" of Obamacare.
So what's the good?
- Comment (89)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
Jan '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Ben, a few questions for you. Before romneycare passed, how did healthcare rates in MA compare to the rest of the country? Also, premium rates have increased dramatically in all states since the time romneycare passed. How much more have rates gone up in MA as compared to other states?
Jan '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
I know its been posited around here that Romney may be restricted from his squishy tendencies by a majority GOP House & Senate.
Might Newt be restricted in his flakiness by that same beltway that dislikes him?
Better to have an internal/party gridlock than one more pronounced by a congress & executive of different parties. In 'internal' filter so to speak.
Aug '10
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Well, it is not equivocation, it is not timidity, and it is not weak-kneed or a half-measured excuse for conservatism. It is a balanced and thoughtful analysis of the significant and important ideological differences between Obamacare and Romneycare. It is a response to a question asked by a reporter. It was recorded last year.
You and your brethren on this post, are obviously looking under every rock to find reasons not to support Mitt Romney. You even go to the extreme of selecting 3 seconds out of a 110 minute context to make your case. The other 107 seconds explain why the 3 seconds should not be a problem for conservatives.
Jul '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
And that's no canard.
Jul '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Doc Stephens
You and your brethren on this post, are obviously looking under every rock to find reasons not to support Mitt Romney. You even go to the extreme of selecting 3 seconds out of a 110 minute context to make your case. The other 107 seconds explain why the 3 seconds should not be a problem for conservatives.
· Dec 17 at 11:08am
Newt would probably end up doing whatever the highest bidding lobbyist would request.
Does that help clarify that plenty of people see both individuals as flawed. It should be no surprise that the real serious fiscal and social conservatives have issues with Romney. But the fact is they better vote for him if he gets the nod and arguments that he is Obama light have some validity but do not even come close to underscoring the benefits of removing our would be dictatorial Marxist in charge.
Jan '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Aaron Miller: "Another similarity is you can't be denied coverage, insurance coverage, if you have a pre-existing condition."
When you force insurers to make losing bets, you undermine the essence of insurance as a self-sustaining business.
And not one of the so-called electable politicians will ever state this. It makes me mad as hell that talking about this aspect of insurance does not happen because voters are so pathetic -- voters actually believe that insurers owe them protections (some times even after the insurable event has happened).
It doesn't matter whether it's health insurance or Social Security, voters just cannot be bothered with reality.
Jan '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Very little distinguishes Mitt from most people then; right, Todd. Except that Mitt is more knowledgeable about management than most people and that fact alone causes him to be more dangerous as a potential planner.
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Speaking of which, Matthew, if you have time to put up a post about the response to Gov. Haley's endorsement of Romney, filling us in on how folks in your beloved South Carolina appear to be responding, I'd be grateful. A report from someone on the ground would be migthy useful.
Feb '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
DocJay
arguments that he is Obama light have some validity but do not even come close to underscoring the benefits of removing our would be dictatorial Marxist in charge.
My 'Obama light' crack aside, I would vote for Romney without hesitation in the general against Obama. That doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer that someone other than Romney were the recipient of that anti-Obama vote. Unfortunately, I have equally serious qualms about the alternatives currently in contention. It's like having to choose between a myocardial or cerebral infarction.
Edited on December 18, 2011 at 12:13amJan '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
DocJay
Doc Stephens
You and your brethren on this post, are obviously looking under every rock to find reasons not to support Mitt Romney. You even go to the extreme of selecting 3 seconds out of a 110 minute context to make your case. The other 107 seconds explain why the 3 seconds should not be a problem for conservatives.
· Dec 17 at 11:08am
Newt would probably end up doing whatever the highest bidding lobbyist would request.
Does that help clarify that plenty of people see both individuals as flawed. It should be no surprise that the real serious fiscal and social conservatives have issues with Romney. But the fact is they better vote for him if he gets the nod and arguments that he is Obama light have some validity but do not even come close to underscoring the benefits of removing our would be dictatorial Marxist in charge. ·
The GOP candidate in the general has my vote [living in Georgia means that my vote makes no damned difference anyhow]. But these candidates disgust me and I cannot stand any one of them. If the libertarian-leaning ones didn't have some strange ideas regarding foreign affairs...
Mar '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
More fuel for the rage pushing Ron Paul, when all the possibilities seem mired in statism and corruption his insane foreign policy appears as less a roadblock by the hour.
Jan '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
I concur. Though if I had a choice, I'd prefer Johnson to Paul. A Paul presidency would almost ensure that any war the U.S. would find itself entangled in would first have to be formally declared by congress. If congress did declare war [with Iran, for example] I bet that Ron Paul would execute it just fine. Truth for me [at least] is that I prefer Paul to the other two clowns and I think Paul would do much better a siphoning the votes of the young folks and the independents. And what of the SoCons? It's not like they're going to run off to the Democrat camp [just yet] since Paul is pro-life. But I do believe it would create a major plank realignment within the two parties; the Dems courting the SoCons who are too often [not everyone, mind you, but too many] squishy on fiscal conservatism.
Feb '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
So let me get this straight: If Obama gets re-elected we keep Obamacare. If Romney gets elected we also keep Obamacare at least until after the next election, and then assuming Romney wins re-election we get waivers of some sort.
I can already see what the GOP establishment will be telling conservative circa 2016: turn out and vote for Romney, or else your Obamacare waivers will never happen.
Except I don't think the GOP will actually be intact in that scenario. If Romney is so fond of Obamacare that he thinks waivers starting in 2017 is an acceptable plan just what else has Obama done that Romney likes and the GOP base hates?
So I foresee Romney negotiating a waiver plan with Harry Reid- to much establishment fanfare- and going on to negotiate a VAT, an amnesty bill, more tax increases, etc.
And the GOP will split openly and irrevocably. That's a worse disaster than re-electing Obama, in my opinion.
No, I won't vote for Romney, period.
Jul '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Oh goodness Xennady. If the wind is blowing left I could see that happening but I see the wind blowing right and if the ever malleable one gets the nod I will vote for him with trepidation. My dislike of Obama and what I fear Obama will do next term is my driving force. Romney could be effectively muzzled I think but I do share your concerns.
Apr '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Xennady: So let me get this straight: If Obama gets re-elected we keep Obamacare. If Romney gets elected we also keep Obamacare at least until after the next election, and then assuming Romney wins re-election we get waivers of some sort.
I can already see what the GOP establishment will be telling conservative circa 2016: turn out and vote for Romney, or else your Obamacare waivers will never happen.
Except I don't think the GOP will actually be intact in that scenario. If Romney is so fond of Obamacare that he thinks waivers starting in 2017 is an acceptable plan just what else has Obama done that Romney likes and the GOP base hates?
Dec 17 at 1:03pm
My understanding is that Romney has said that he will seek full repeal of Obamacare through the reconciliation process, since it is unlikely that the Republicans will have 60 votes.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/10/12/mitt-romney-commits-to-repealing-obamacare-via-reconciliation/
Feb '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
wmartin
My understanding is that Romney has said that he will seek full repeal of Obamacare through the reconciliation process, since it is unlikely that the Republicans will have 60 votes.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/10/12/mitt-romney-commits-to-repealing-obamacare-via-reconciliation/
Excellent.
So what happens when Harry Reid objects?
I sincerely hope I'm wrong. But I just don't have enough trust in Mitt "Oily Sheen" Romney to think he will actually be willing to fight through Democratic opposition to actually repeal Obamacare via reconciliation.
Especially after this video.
Feb '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Again, I hope I'm wrong. But I see disaster if Obama is re-elected and different disaster if Romney wins.
I think Romney will shatter the Republlican party, leaving the left a weak, divided opposition to the left in 2014 and 2016. At least if Obama is re-elected the GOP will stay intact, leaving the voters a place to turn when and if Obama attempts to be a new Chavez or Allende, as Obama often fantasizes about.
With Romney we've got a guy with bad political skills who really doesn't seem to have much of a problem with the leftist agenda.
That's not a recipe for political success for conservatives, no matter which way the wind is blowing.
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Doc Stephens
Well, it is not equivocation, it is not timidity, and it is not weak-kneed or a half-measured excuse for conservatism. It is a balanced and thoughtful analysis of the significant and important ideological differences between Obamacare and Romneycare. It is a response to a question asked by a reporter. It was recorded last year.
You and your brethren on this post, are obviously looking under every rock to find reasons not to support Mitt Romney. You even go to the extreme of selecting 3 seconds out of a 110 minute context to make your case. The other 107 seconds explain why the 3 seconds should not be a problem for conservatives.
· Dec 17 at 11:08am
Doc, if you really think there are "significant and important ideological differences between Obamacare and Romneycare," you should spell them out in a post. If we are wrong, instruct us.
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
I should be clear: Romney is not the author of the problems of high health care costs in Massachusetts. My objection is that his attempt at reform made the existing problem worse, not better. While the Bay State has been in the top tier of premium rates for some time, and premium rates have increased in all states, Massachusetts has exceeded the national average significantly. You can read more on some of the recent reports here.
According to Sally Pipes: "A 2010 study published in the Forum for Health Economics & Policy found that health insurance premiums in Massachusetts were increasing at a rate 3.7% slower than the national average prior to the implementation of RomneyCare. Post-overhaul, they're increasing 5.8% faster."
Apr '11
Re: Romney on Obamacare: "Repeal the Bad and Keep the Good"
Paul A. Rahe
Doc, if you really think there are "significant and important ideological differences between Obamacare and Romneycare," you should spell them out in a post. If we are wrong, instruct us. · Dec 17 at 1:49pm
a: The three he spells out in the video, of which the big one is Federalism and the 10th Amendment.
b: A fourth he doesn't mention. You don't have to buy insurance, but can get by with HSAs. Not sure why he doesn't talk about this more.
This video isn't any different from what he's said in debates and throughout the year, although he is a little more ambiguous in the video. It was clear at the time, and has been even clearer since, that he would repeal the federal mandate. It's my guess that he might keep something of an exchange concept and apply it to his interstate insurance purchase plan, but that's just a guess.