While I agree that Mitt looks wishy-washy here, it WAS his idiotic spokesman who said it....and he should fire him because it’s not the first time the guy has screwed up...
that being said, he does back up his interpretation based on the reading of the decision about the difference between state powers and fed powers...it’s the only way he can play this . He’s got to do more though..he’s got to say what he is going to replace it with (insurance across state lines, HSAs, competition, etc)as well as point out that taxes and wasteful bureaucracy of this monstrosity
see post #13
What Romney’s spokesman said agreed with Scalia and the dissent, which Roberts should have joined. If you don’t agree with the Supreme Court decision then you have to side with Scalia.
The Romney spokesman did not agree with Roberts’ decision, just the opposite.
People here are mixing up the “it’s been declared a tax” political argument, with the Supreme Court decision itself.
I find it difficult to believe that somewhere in the NJ Romneycare there was not one or more things that didn’t pan out as intended by cause of various circumstances. Romney should list these things and then with political pie on his face make a forthright statement like ‘it just shows to go that sometimes there are unintended consequences which make a total overall necessary especially when the entire USA is involved’. This would indicate a man of analysis, perspective, and honest intents. Question? Has Romney the character to do such?