Skip to comments.Romney touts Massachusetts health plan
Posted on 08/24/2012 11:01:32 PM PDT by WilliamIII
DENVER Mitt Romney said in an interview Thursday that his plan to provide universal health insurance in Massachusetts was superior to President Obama's own health care plan.
"My health care plan I put in place in my state has everyone insured, but we didn't go out and raise taxes on people and have a unelected board tell people what kind of health care they can have," Romney said in an interview with CBS' Denver affiliate, KCNC.
Obama's plan was modeled on Romney's, which has made some conservatives wary of the former Massachusetts governor. Some GOP activists were angered when a Romney spokeswoman touted the Massachusetts plan on Fox News earlier this month.
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
dumb move idjit: here we are doing you the big favor of dragging you over the finish line, and you go and add news cycle fodder to make it harder.
words of advice: forget romneycare. it’s a big skeleton in your closet. close the door again, and keep it closed!
I have absolutely no problem if Romney wants to defend Romneycare.
Some people don’t seem to get the distinction between a sovereign state devising its own system and a federal government telling 310 million people how to live their lives.
Now if somebody is from Mass. and they think it is bad policy, I would judge Romney on that, but I don’t buy the argument that Romneycare and Obamacare are the same thing.
By “REPEAL AND REPLACE”, Romney’s plan is to repeal Obamacare on the condition that Romneycare be mandated in the other 49 states.
So we replace one big socialized medicine fiasco with 50 little socialized medicine fiascoes.
“You knew what I was when you picked me up.”
“I have absolutely no problem if Romney wants to defend Romneycare.
Some people dont seem to get the distinction between a sovereign state devising its own system and a federal government telling 310 million people how to live their lives.
Now if somebody is from Mass. and they think it is bad policy, I would judge Romney on that, but I dont buy the argument that Romneycare and Obamacare are the same thing.”
RomneyCare was an unprecedented piece of legislation. The way you describe it, you act as if it would be just a normal thing for a state to consider. MittensCare violates the very essence and spirit of the MA constitution as intended by John Adams, the man who wrote it. The slaves of that state who helped institute that fraud, including the same socialist member of the DSA who went on to help Obama craft ObamaCare, claim rights and absolute powers of the government that are simply not mentioned in their own state constitution. That is why Mittens defined the mandate as a tax, and not a mandate. He had the same problem Obama did on the national level.
And as for whenever Mittens claims that RomneyCare “worked.” That also is a lie. RomneyCare does NOT insure everyone, and, in fact, I don’t believe there was even a change in the stats before and after it went into effect. In fact, nothing actually changed with RomneyCare. Prices continued to go up, money continued to be spent. The only difference is that the government now had more power over the lives of the people. Even Bill O’Reilly pointed that out, and Mittens reply was “Well, they were HIGH before.” Mitt Romney is a pathological liar and doesn’t even understand what the problem is of his own law, and won’t even be honest about its failure. Instead, each time he opens his mouth on this, he paints it as the greatest thing ever. He is a liar.
But he doesn’t believe the federal government has authority to enforce or collect money for such a plan, right? Romney supporters, please chime in on his understanding of Art I Sec 8.
This jackwagon is depending on a whole bunch of folks who are swallowing REAL HARD before pulling the lever for him for no other reason than too end the rein of Il Duce.The LAST thing he needs to be doing at this point is rubbing THIS crap in our faces. This is a tenuous "alliance", at best.
He's the nominee. Don't you want to know what he is really thinking?
Do you want him to pretend he is someone he isn't? Do you want him to actually pretend he is not a homosexualist, abortion loving, gun grabbing socialist?
You want to bury your head in the sand and pretend he's going to be another Ronald Reagan?
No, I say, tell it like it is Mittens. Tell us who you really are.
So you're cool if Bernie Sanders becomes governor of Vermont and changes them over to communism? And if he wants to run for President as a Republican and advocate every state do the same thing, you're cool with that too?
States’ rights don’t trump stupidity and evil.
OBAMACARE vs. ROMNEYCARE
Advantages and Disadvantages and How Can Unfunded Mandates be Funded?
While the controversy about Paul Ryan’s Ayn Rand sentiments are made much of in the media, what counts is what Rand has actually advised, and these are filtered through AGB100’s clear lenses:
Ayn Rand asked: What is Important?
Her Answer: REALITY.
Meaning, that is what is not real - for example false, misleading and politically-agenda-driven information - is NOT real and therefore unimportant.
AGB100 often says:
Everything is so....Unless it isn’t.
There’s NOTHING common about COMMON SENSE.
Former PM of the U.K. Winston Churchill said:
It’s not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what’s required.
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.
Ergo, we shall look at the RESULTS and facts behind ObamaCare and RomneyCare - the the history of US policy regarding MEDICARE and SOCIAL SECURITY - both of which are going broke and both of which are unfunded (meaning there is no funding upcoming for them.)
“The main REASON Medicare has a shortfall is that Obama took $700+ billion FROM Medicare to fund Obamacare. The fact is, no matter what, no one over 55 with get a cut in services. If Medicare is not reformed, there will be no Medicare for people UNDER 55 - no matter what.”
“Most of the world’s advanced nations have privatized, even Russia where the workers CHOSE to privatize. Australia, the UK and many other western nations have long ago privatized.
Actuarial stats prove that part public and part private pension plans (the best we can hope for in the US) produce easily TWICE the net returns that purely publicly-funded plans produce. In other words, you’d be receiving twice the money you are receiving today.
Moreover, you have NO security for either medical or social security. Forget the word SECURITY.
The reason is that YOU DON’T OWN THE MONEY IN THE MEDICAL OR SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUNDS.
The Democrats not only rid the “TRUST” in the fund’s provisions and its funding, they had taken the money out....and placed it into GENERAL REVENUE. And then they TAXED your social security payouts.
THAT, is the reason why BOTH Democratic pet government programs are broke. They had put the pets up for adoption and had abandoned them.
In two rulings by the high courts, one Helvering and Nestor, it was deemed that you do not OWN the money you had placed into Social Security, but the GOVERNMENT does. In short, Social Security went from a trust savings and insurance account that was intended to protect you, to a payout from general funds which BY LAW government is not obligated to pay out.
Those laws were passed by Democrats and OPPOSED by Republicans.
And then, as stated earlier, to finalize the insult upon injury and rub salt into the festering wound they had created, the Democrats TAXED your social security payments!
KellyJay at AllVoices blogs:
KellyJaye | about 1 hour ago
Let’s all start on the same page: http://paulryan.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperity2013.pdf
Also, reflect upon the fact that the current Medicare system is already on course for technical bankruptcy. As the latest Trustees Report notes: “The HI [Medicare] fund again fails the test of short-range financial adequacy, as projected assets are already below one year’s projected expenditures and are expected to continue declining . . . The HI 75-year actuarial imbalance amounts to 36 percent of tax receipts or 26 percent of program cost.”
For workers currently under the age of 55*, beginning in 2023, retirees could choose to continue with traditional fee-for-service Medicare as it now exists OR they could choose to accept a premium support and shop for health insurance on their own.
Plans would have to cover at least the actuarial equivalent of traditional Medicare and seniors who choose a cheaper plan would be eligible for a rebate. Seniors selecting a costlier plan would be responsible for the extra burden.
Premium support would be amended for the sickest seniors and premium support would be means-tested so the poorest or sickest seniors could still access a private health insurance plan if they so choose.
*Again, the Ryan plan DOES NOT AFFECT THOSE 55 AND OLDER - everything remains the same for this age group.
Obamacare’s Medicare Value-Based purchasing program pays hospitals differently based on federal quality measures. This could lead to hospitals treating patients with the best value in Medicare reimbursement rather than the most effective treatment.
Expanding Medicaid and cutting provider payments for Medicare providers will lead to shortages of doctors and much longer waits for health care. In Boston, under the near universal Romneycare, for example, the average wait to see a primary care physician is two months while the rest of the country’s average wait is about three weeks.
Many doctors, over-worked from administering all the new “free” Obamacare mandates, will decide to enter so-called “concierge” medical services.
A patient would pay a yearly retainer in exchange for a doctor having a much smaller patient list and more access to the doctor for advice and medical visits. A typical family doctor currently sees 2,500 patients but by moving to concierge services, that doctor would now only take on about 500 — leaving 2,000 patients to find a new doctor.
Finally, Obamacare guts the popular Medicare Advantage program, where seniors can choose a health insurance policy that better fits their needs than the traditional Medicare plan does.
Other articles you may want to read:
Health Insurance Ruling Wont Make Coverage Cheaper For Most Americans, The Huffington Post, 6/28/12
Jeffrey Young, Health Care Costs Rise Nearly 6 Percent Nationwide: Report, The Huffington Post, 4/20/12
National Health Expenditure Projections: Modest Annual Growth Until Coverage Expands And Economic Growth Accelerates, Health Affairs, no. (2012)
Robert Pear, Ambiguity In Health Law Could Make Family Coverage Too Costly For Many, The New York Times, 8/11/12
LASTLY friends, Romney’s Tax Returns have nothing to do with it UNTILL Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi release their last three years for the tens of millions they had made through insider trading. Besides, Romney HAS released his last two years, including the fact known nationwide: The Romneys have given tens of millions to charitable causes and had created jobs across the nation. Meanwhile, Nevada and California, Harry Reid’s and Nancy Pelosi’s states, are broke, have the highest foreclosures in the nation and the highest unemployment in the nation. And Harry and Nancy tell us we shoudl be more concerned about how Romney spends his money than how Obama spends yours. THERE IS NOTHING COMMON ABOUT COMMON SENSE.
It seems that if I decline to flush my self-respect down the crapper on 11/6, I'm casting a vote for The Kenyan.
Having been shamed into voting for this RINO jackass, I'd just prefer not to be reminded of what he really is.
Scorpions have a nature, don’t they?
Sheesh. Not this crap again. Give it a rest, Romney.
Oops, meant to post this article here: http://www.whoromneyis.com/Issues/RomneyCareObamaCare.html
BASED ON ENTIRELY CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES, and lauded by conservatives. Conservatives Sowed Idea Of Health Care Mandate - how soon they forget! (Applauded by Conservatives for use of conservative principles and innovation achieving a greater good for the uninsured.)
NOT A GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE SYSTEM. Romney insisted on it being free market.
Only a COST SHARING requirement for “free riders”, to prevent state from taxpayers paying for those who could afford health insurance.
Romney vetoed Democratic legislature’s fee for businesses
The 85% Democratic legislature did slip in some items, which Romney vetoed but they overrode.
NO NEW TAXES (Vs. ObamaCare of 3.8% additional taxes, plus lots of fees) Romney insisted on that.
Low Complexity: Massachusetts bill: 70 pages. ObamaCare: 2700 pages
LANDMARK ACHIEVEMENT, supported by those on the left and the right.
ObamaCare is completely different, an extreme, borrowing only a few basics. See RCare compared to OCare.
I think that it would be best to look at RCare compared to OCare and the individual mandate, if you want to quickly understand what actually happened. And figure out if there really was an “individual mandate” or what really went on.
Why the bill had to be done
A bill was going to be passed anyway, so Romney gathered together experts, who proposed innovative
ideas to improve a bill that was going to be passed anyway. They did the best they could against an
85% Democratic legislature
Uninsured residents were not covered, which had a high cost to it
$395 million in federal funds - Required to be restructured to go to individuals rather than institution.
Romney only one of all states to request to keep saved funds of $580 million
Coverage very high
98.1 percent of state residents
99.8 percent of children; 99.6 percent of seniors
Easy overview: Just go to RCare compared to OCare and the individual mandate. This should be sufficient for most people to see that Romney just proposed “cost sharing” and did a few big rescues.
Romney is angling for the disaffected liberal vote.
You don't need to sacrifice your principles to vote for him because he doesn't give a damn if the 10% or less of us principled conservatives vote for him.
His plan is to garner enough liberal, independent and RINO votes so that he is not beholden to any conservative principles that he does not share.
It is sad that you are so eager to chuck your principles to vote for a man who has none.
I find it interesting that (according to your tagline) you are asking for God to help you to vote for Romney? You are asking God to assist you in chucking your principles? You really want Him to answer that prayer? Really? God help you?
It is just Romney being Romney. You expected something different?
Jim, you really need to reconsider your recent reconsideration. :>)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.