If I read Romney right, he argues in terms of the 10th amendment.
Powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the States by the Constitution are reserved to the States or the people.
This includes individual mandates which Romney insists is CONSTITUTIONAL as long as it is done AT THE STATE and NOT at the Federal level.
Therefore, based on Romney’s argument, The HUGE difference between the health care bills is that Romneycare is constitutional (allowed by the 10th amendment) and Obamacare is not (NOT allowed by the 10th amendment).
Not defending Romney at all, but since you asked, I am just giving a summary of HIS argument.
BTW, the above does not address the ECONOMICS of the issue. even at the state level, the individual mandate DID NOTHING to solve Massachusetts ballooning healthcare costs. But that is another issue altogether.
What was the source that you read?
My concern is that now that so many “team-players” have joined his RINO train, he feels comfortable enough to start trying to “appeal” to the Liberals. (”Severe” Conservatism has really been a burden that Romney will glad to be shed of, ASAP.)
So I need to get a direct quote before I can “Flame and Blame” the Romney choo-choo!