Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
One of the few Republicans in the country who's been tirelessly pushing for the implementation of Obamacare at the state level has been tapped to head Mitt Romney's transition team, should he become president.
Former HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt, and his consulting group Leavitt Partners, are the primary advocates within Republican circles for implementation of Obamacare's exchanges. It just so happens that his consultancy is one of the major beneficiaries of the taxpayer funded gold mine of hundreds of millions of dollars in exchange implementation grants. But that's a coincidence, of course.
Leavitt has said some relatively positive things about certain elements of Obama’s health reform law, suggesting earlier this year that “Obamacare” empowers the HHS secretary “to do certain things that are clearly aimed at trying to move us in the right direction.”
McKeown, who still works with Leavitt at his Utah-based health care consultancy, acknowledged that the former governor does not want to undo one key part of the controversial legislation.
“We believe that the exchanges are the solution to small business insurance market and that’s gotten us sideways with some conservatives,” he said.
The exchanges are not only a matter of principle for Leavitt — they’re also a cash cow.
The size of his firm, Leavitt Partners, doubled in the year after the bill was signed as they won contracts to help states set up the exchanges funded by the legislation.
Over the past year, Leavitt and his staff have repeatedly tangled with conservative and libertarian think-tanks and advocates who oppose him on this point, understanding that there is no such thing as a state run exchange under Obamacare, and that this represents the primary front for states in the battle against Obamacare's implementation. This hasn't stopped him from lobbying all over the country for it. Here's Leavitt speaking last year to the National Governors Association, urging them to implement while failing to disclose his financial stake in doing so.
Speaking to a bipartisan group of governors at the National Governors Association, the former Republican governor who served as secretary of health and human services in the Bush administration, called the exchanges where individuals and small businesses can purchase health plans “a very practical solution to a problem that needs to be solved.” He warned governors who are reluctant to move forward with their state-level exchanges that their intransigence will only empower federal regulators.
And he said the health care law that passed is a compromise that gives the states the flexibility they need.
“This is a profoundly important time for the states,” said Mr. Leavitt. “States need to lead.” ...
The federal law gives the states until January 2014 to set up their own exchanges, with federal oversight. If they fail to do so, their citizens will get access to a federal exchange.
But some Republican governors have been reluctant. They oppose the federal law and say they hope it will be repealed by a Republican president in 2013.
Mr. Leavitt urged them to get moving anyway... He urged the governors not defend their “partisan flags” over the interests of their states.
Thankfully, this has been a push that Leavitt has been losing. A host of Republican governors have turned back his appeal to implement (you can read my own case against exchange implementation here). In fact, their obstinate refusal to implement has become an item of support in the courts for overturning Obamacare. And now most Republican-led states are holding back to see what happens at the Supreme Court, as they should've done in the first place.
One can argue about the merits of an exchange absent Obamacare's rules, regulations, authority shifts, price controls, and taxpayer funded subsidies. But the overwhelming majority of conservative policymakers understand that Obamacare's exchanges are nothing more than delivery mechanisms for massive taxpayer-funded subsidies and bureaucratic regulations from Washington. What's more, states which avoid implementing exchanges may be able to avoid the implementation of Obamacare almost in its entirety.
Those who favor implementation have been rebuffed, and they don't like it. As Michael Cannon notes:
USA Today reports that groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council and the Cato Institute have had much success in discouraging states from creating Obamacare’s health insurance “exchanges.” Even the Heritage Foundation, which once counseled states to establish “defensive” Obamacare exchanges, now counsels states to refuse to create them and to send all exchange-related grants back to Washington.
In response, Obamacare contractor and self-described conservative Republican Cheryl Smith sniffs: "When you work at a think-tank, it’s really easy to come up with these really high-risk plans."
Except, there is no risk to states. The only risks to this strategy are that health insurance companies won’t get half a trillion dollars in taxpayer subsidies, and that certain Obamacare contractors won’t get any more of those lucrative exchange contracts.
Smith works for Leavitt Partners. So does David Merritt, who as recently as two months ago, was making the case that Republicans should ignore the positions of governors like Bobby Jindal and Rick Scott and implement exchanges. Neither, of course, notes their financial stake in doing so (but hey, it's a living).
What's most concerning about all of this is not that Romney selected one of the few Republicans in the country who backs implementation of Obamacare's exchanges. It's what the selection of Leavitt means as an indication of how Romney would potentially "fix" Obamacare if repeal proves impossible. According to Politico, "already, plugged-in Republicans from Washington to Salt Lake City are buzzing that Leavitt could make his own transition next January into the job of White House chief of staff or as a Valerie Jarrett-like personal counselor to a President Romney."
Should the Supreme Court strike down only a portion of Obamacare, it seems clear Leavitt would be a major voice in deciding how to replace it. And he is convinced that "exchanges are part of the future, no matter what."
UPDATE: Matt Lewis reached out to Team Romney for response, and they say not to worry.
- Comment (50)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments:
Jul '10
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
I told you so.
(Not you personally, of course, Ben.)
Edited on June 4, 2012 at 12:46amMay '11
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
I'm not going to panic. It's too nice a day. I'm going to hold my nose, vote for Romney, then reassess in January, or whenever the cabinet appointments are made, whether panic is necessary.
May '11
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
This is the kind of thing conservatives have to push back hard and early on.
The GOP has to understand that business as usual is not acceptable.
A crony capitalist leading the transition team. Good grief.
May '12
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
Ok, I've been encouraged about Romney lately, but this... not so much. The needle ticks down. Nevertheless, Romney's got my vote. This shows the need for conservative wins in the House and Senate. Here's hoping for a Supreme Court smack-down as well.
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
I think it's just a reminder that Phil Klein is right.
May '11
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
I love the new media. Ben only has a few thousand twitter followers, but many of them have a microphone and influential connections in DC.
Matt Lewis of The Daily Caller got a response from the Romney campaign about these concerns.
It's just words, but at least there is a response with firm commitments to repeal.
May '10
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
He gets elected and tells the rest of real conservatives to go suck lemons. Just watch.
Still have to vote for him over the other guy, though. Lessor or two evils.
Vote Team Romney: Driving America into Tyranny slower than the other Guy!
Jan '12
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
John Derbyshire may not be the best liked person among some at Ricochet, but when he wrote We Are Doomed, he wasn't just frothing with uncivilized blather.
He came from a more rural part of England that in some ways resembled small-town America. Neighbors felt they shared a common culture, and they would look out for each other, help each other when they could. British socialism had not expanded so obscenely when he was a child. The insidious conspiracy between the mammary state and the nanny state had only begun to metastasize. But the cancer has only grown to maleficent proportions, fed by the two-stage virus.
So, we push aside Obama's stage-4 only to grasp Romney's virulence-lite. Marvelous! Awesome, even, considering that these seem to be the only two public choices available.
Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.
Edited on June 4, 2012 at 4:20amMay '10
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
Take it up with Paul Ryan then, because state-based exchanges have been part of his Roadmap since the get-go. I haven't a clue whether such schemes are workable, but let's not suggest that since one element of a gazillion-page bill overlaps with some policy proposal of a Romney advisor, it means, QED, Romney is a stealth Obamacare supporter.
Mar '11
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
And here I was feeling bad because I couldn't join in the thrill-up-the-leg fest on Friday.
Jul '10
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
If we make it to 2016 without some form of ObomneyCare imposed on the republic, it will be because we sat on this squirming toad of a likely nominee the whole way and whacked him every time he moved in that direction. Of course, if he achieves reelection, we know what 2017 will bring.
May '12
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
Gov. Romney is a great business leader with outstanding character, but things like this make me think he and/or his staff do not get it.
Admittedly I may be in the minority around here, but I don't think this election is going to be won with a rallying cry of pragmatic evolution. 2010 wasn't a marginal adjustment (although I concede it is hard to tell from what little the house of reps stands for) it was a statement about making a big course change.
Hiring a guy with a vested interest to implement a bastardized portion of Obamacare isn't a big course change, it is more of the same with a different guy behind the wheel.
Dec '10
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
Good. Now I can stop pretending that I'm a "Go Romney" guy and return to my original thinking that he's a spineless tool who will sell out conservatives the day after his first nasty New York Times editorial.
May '12
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
Bryan G. Stephens: He gets elected and tells the rest of real conservatives to go suck lemons. Just watch.
Still have to vote for him over the other guy, though. Lessor or two evils.
Vote Team Romney: Driving America into Tyranny slower than the other Guy! · 42 minutes ago
Nailed it.
Nobody is going to stay home over something like this, but just showing up and holding our nose isn't going to win this election. It is going to take 'willing to die for what Romney stands for' type enthusiasm.
There are more people on food stamps than live in Spain, as many people receive something from the fed gov't. as there are paying into it via income taxes and all of them are going to be fighting to keep what they have and keep Obama in office.
If Romney doesn't have equal passion supporting him and what he stands for as those that will turn out for the entitlement state then I think we are toast.
Dec '10
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
Gentlemen,
Let's get clear about postulate no. 1. Obamacare is 100% complete toast. The mandate will be struck down by the Court. President Romney and the Republican House and the Republican Senate will repeal anything that's left.
We live in a society that still teaches Strict Darwinism (Krypto-Fascism) and Man Made Global Warming (Krypto-Bolshevism) as Science. Such a world can not be trusted with even more Statist control.
Regards,
Jim
Apr '11
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
I guess this is what we're going to be all hysterical about for the next week or so.
Nov '11
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
This is why the two parties craft the myth that you MUST MUST MUST hold your nose and vote for their candidate or else the sky will fall.
So it doesn't matter how odious Romney is, you have no choice.
Apr '11
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
Fred Cole: This is why the two parties craft the myth that you MUST MUST MUST hold your nose and vote for their candidate or else the sky will fall.
So it doesn't matter how odious Romney is, you have no choice. · 5 minutes ago
I can't believe this group is going into such hysterics over some guy who will be performing the purely administrative task of overseeing the transition.
"Odious?!?" Geez...
May '12
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
wmartin
Fred Cole: This is why the two parties craft the myth that you MUST MUST MUST hold your nose and vote for their candidate or else the sky will fall.
So it doesn't matter how odious Romney is, you have no choice. · 5 minutes ago
I can't believe this group is going into such hysterics over some guy who will be performing the purely administrative task of overseeing the transition.
"Odious?!?" Geez... · 1 minute ago
Because the man who is asking for our support to be the next President of the United States put this gentleman in the position for 'purely administrative task...'.
It isn't about Mr. Leavitt - it is about the person that thinks this is a good idea.
Nov '11
Re: Romney's Transition Leader Favors Implementing Obamacare
Hey Ben, I'll just ignore this sentence:
and go ahead and pretend that you're arguing against the concept of exchanges. Also, I'll go ahead and ignore the conflict of interest aspect of this story wrt Leavitt. Thanks for trying, though!