Skip to comments.Romney: I'll Keep Parts of Obamacare
Posted on 09/09/2012 7:28:36 PM PDT by SoConPubbieEdited on 09/09/2012 7:33:01 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who has called for scrapping President Barack Obama's 2010 U.S. healthcare law, said in remarks aired on Sunday that he likes key parts of "Obamacare" despite his party's loathing of it and wants to retain them.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
I'm smart enough to know that ANY vote, except for Mitt, will give Obama my vote to continue to completely destroy the United States of America.
That I will NEVER do!
Romney: “there are a number of things that I like in healthcare reform that I’m going to put in place”
MITT ROMNEY: We’re going to replace Obamacare. And I’m replacing it with my own plan. And even in Massachusetts when I was governor, our plan there deals with pre-existing conditions and with young people.
DAVID GREGORY: So you’d keep that part of the federal plan?
MITT ROMNEY: Well, I’m not getting rid of all of healthcare reform. Of course there are a number of things that I like in healthcare reform that I’m going to put in place. One is to make sure that those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage. Two is to assure that the marketplace allows for individuals to have policies that cover their family up to whatever age they might like. I also want individuals to be able to buy insurance, health insurance, on their own as opposed to only being able to get it on a tax advantage basis through their company.
He did not say "I want to keep parts of Obamacare on Meet The Press. You did not hear it with your own ears and you and Newsmax are lying...I just read the entire transcript.
Go shill for Obama where you won't have your lies refuted.
Thanks for the transcript excerpt, FreeReign. Makes more sense and for less drama.
“It’s pretty clear that Romney will disappoint us.”
“One other thing is clear: Bambi wants to destroy us and everything we believe and care for.”
Absolutely! Too bad the primaries didn’t go better, but this is what we have, and if Obama is reelected, it might be the end of the U.S.A. as we know it.
“I thiuk he needs to fully explain his intent on this before people go off the deep end.”
More importantly, the GOP members of Congress must insure that “repeal of Obamacare” means “repeal of Obamacare”, and “health insurance reform” goes back to market-based reforms from the GOP ignored by the Dims and intent on improving the marketplace of health insurance and NOT intent on growing government or growing government run health inurance.
Here are the two things they mention:
“One is to make sure that those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage.
“Two is to assure that the marketplace allows for individuals to have policies that cover their family up to whatever age they might like.”
The first is imperative, and is also a problem if not implemented correctly. As conservatives, we oppose the idea that people can simply avoid coverage and then get it when they get sick. We also oppose mandating that they buy coverage.
But, only a few conservatives are willing to state that they want sick people to be left to die on the sidewalk in front of an emergency room if they can’t pay for their treatment. And if you aren’t willing to do that, you need to accept that you are “covering pre-existing conditions”, and figure out what the best way is to do that.
I like the current way, where we make hospitals treat people, then they try to collect money, and when that fails, they pass the price along to everybody else. I “like” that because while it sucks to have to pick up the tab, at least we aren’t encouraging people to use the system that way. We are simply handling the fallout.
Another way is a pool coverage for risky patients. You’d have to subsidize it. But that’s how it is now — major employers don’t exclude pre-existing conditions, they simply pay extra and the insurance company covers everybody.
Or you can let government cover that pre-existing condition problem under some welfare program, and pay for it with taxes.
One thing is certain — you aren’t going to get away with doing nothing at all, because a vast majority of voters LOVE the abstract idea that they won’t lose their insurance coverage for a pre-existing condition, and they are too stupid to understand the consequences.
As for the 2nd one, I fully support that. It’s stupid regulations that keep insurance companies from offering family policies that extend past adulthood. Now practically speaking, it’s kind of a stupid offering, but if I want to keep paying for my kids insurance under my policy, why shouldn’t my insurance company be allowed to sell me that kind of coverage?
Of course, Obamacare dictates it, whether I want it or not, and therefore makes me PAY for it for my kids, even if I don’t want to. But since that’s not what Romney said he’d do, it’s not a problem. The article screws up by suggesting that any broad discussion equals a specific acceptance of details of Obamacare.
Even if his policy proposals all had the wisdom of Solomon and the brilliance of Einstein, someone needs to tell Mitt that just because he is poised to replace Emperor Barack, that he does not become Emperor Mitt. I don’t know how they do it in Mass. but the US Constitution does not provide for Mitt feeding a bill to Congress.
You’re welcome Girlene.
Romney continues to work for the Obama campaign. Now this is the same man that said time and time again that on day one he would REPEAL OBAMACARE! No he won’t. He wants to keep part of it he likes and replace the rest with his socialized health care program. He puts his damn foot in his mouth every time he opens it on a talk show. He does not have enough sense to keep his mouth shut.
Here's a link to the entire transcript.
Find the words "I want to keep parts of Obamacare in this transcript and get back to me. Thanks in advance.
Looking forward to it!
Romney is also quoted on abortion, and since quotes themselves are owned by the public figure, they can be repeated here. After saying he wanted the court to overturn the Roe v. Waide ruling:
“Well, there are a number of things I think that need to be said about preserving and protecting the life of the unborn child. And I recognize there are two lives involved: the mom and the unborn child. And I believe that people of good conscience have chosen different paths in this regard. But I am pro-life and will intend, if I’m president of the United States, to encourage pro-life policies.”
Chance that Obama will appoint a judge who would overturn Roe V. Wade = 0%. Chance that we will get a judge who will overturn Roe V. Wade by voting for someone other than Romney? 0%. The value of the lives of the children who will be killed? Priceless.
Agggh, two issues perpetually getting confused.
Mitt wants to get a new bill through (he talks as though it will be his bill — Constitutionally it can’t be — but that’s another argument) that has a few “good ideas” in it. While voiding PPACA per se in its entirety.
Mitt also still thinks, asininely, that Romneycare actually did good for Massachusetts and that all states ought to think about doing it. Yeh, and almost all states will tell him take a flying leap. But he is pondering no Federal mandate towards that end, and that is key.
For your amusement: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2928787/posts?page=90#90
At least he sounds optimistic in that he'll be in office to be able to do something.
"For all have sinned, and come short of the Glory of God."
"there is no one who does good, not even one."
GOod luck finding a perfect man to vote for. Every man is the lesser of two evils. .
Thanks in advance.
It would be nice if Romney knew the power of his words. He’s done this before (spoke and forgot to monitor his words)... he doesn’t always say what he intends to mean. On the otherhand... who thought Romney was the perfect man for the job. I didn’t. But if obama stays for 4 more years, we won’t recognize our once great country.
he will keep most of it. He will just trim around the edges until it looks like RomneyCare as in Massachusetts. The part he wpecifically mentioned as bìng good is not letting companies refuse or charge more to treat people with pre-existing conditions. That all by itself makes medical insurance absurd, It becomes stupid for anyone to buy insurance until hi is sick or has an accident.So healthy people need not buy the product. If only sick people buy it the price must become astronomical and no one at all can afford it. The logic of it requires mandatory purchase and that way lies full blown socialized medicine either immediately or a little later- socialized medicine and a fatally wounded economy and severely straitened Liberty.
Take your choice in November, the efficient manager of the socialist project or the revolutionary. Mussolini or Lenin. The both lead to Stalin. One will just be a little nicer about it in the beginning.
I’m getting hot under the collar and will probably have to alert the admin moderator to my own posts.
EXACTLY. Those who express shock or find some way to explain this other than that Romney is our Obama . . .well, I gotta bridge for you.
Know this as fact. Romney will KILL Conservatism.
I thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen.
Just watched the local news and they were reporting it like the article here. Conservatives will go off the deep end if it’s left hanging like this.
Even before Obamacare, the health insurance plan that my company arranged with the insurance company for me still covered my children past age 21, if they were still my dependents.
The correct answer to that question is “as long as the parents are willing to continue to pay the extra cost of coverage for the children”.
And government’s job is to make sure regulations don’t preclude that coverage. Insurance companies will be glad to continue writing policies, and some parents will be glad to pay them.
Because parents know that if their 22-year-old doesn’t buy insurance, and gets sick, the parents are going to make sure they don’t die, whatever the cost. That’s what parents do for their children.
Why are you so concerned with dictating what the correct “conservative” age is to force children off the parent’s insurance coverage? It doesn’t seem conservative to me to interject your opinion into the private contracts of others.
Thanks for transcript. I read it and you’re right, he never said those things. Geez.
OK Mitt—What parts do you like and what parts do you want to chuck. I will be open minded enough to listen while you make your case.
Sheesh, if I act surprised will that win me “respect” from all the ABOs who've been hatin’ on conservatives around here...
I’m not Mitt. If I were, first thing I would do is quit the LDS.
Why should states dictate what is in a private contract between me and my health insurance company? Why can't I decide what coverage I want, and then deal with the companies to pay for it?
What I need government to do is to make sure the insurance companies don't cheat me out of my money, and are capable of fulfilling the contract they sign with me.
I call them the FR50.
Willing to help reelect the worst, most divisive, most destructive, pro-Marx, pro-death, pro-gay, anti-liberty, anti-free enterprise, anti-God, Anti-american, anti-everything we love and care for administration ever so they can finish us off once and for all.
It hurts they could be this stupid, and would be funny in another place and time......
We have no influence over the socialist democrats or the emperor obama should he be re-elected. None. Nada.
We do have the ability to revolt and influence the future of the GOP if we plan accordingly by reacting to our internal outrage over the direction that these corrupt collectivists have taken this country.
Wrong, very wrong. The government can never create outcome measures that will improve outcomes. Just like every other endeavor and industry, outcomes MUST be evaluated by the billions of decisions made by consumers every day in the free market. The patient, that is the consumer,
must be in a position to determine the price and value of healthcare, not government masterminds. The patient is put in charge when THEIR money (HSAs) is used to purchase healthcare, directly and through real catastrophic insurance. The government’s role in healthcare should be devoted to maintaining the ‘safety net’ instead of socializing the entire system, and in adherence with the Constitution, this should be done at the State level.
When the government creates incentives for what they regard as ‘good care’, inevitably, providers find ways to avoid risky and costly patients in order to optimize the government outcomes and rewards. Government outcome goals will only lead to ‘gaming’ of the system. This will result in providers competing for the ‘worried well’ and avoiding sick, non compliant patients.
The health care system can improve if we adhere to free market principles. Allowing IPAB boards and government masterminds to make medical descions is an affront to individual sovereignty and those that cherish liberty.
Nothing can be Romneycare except Romneycare.
Yes, it will be useful to press Mitt whether he wants to carve something out in Federal policy to accommodate more Romneycare’s. It has been years since Mitt voiced anything that would even remotely sound like this.
A “child” is an adult at age 21.
He/she should not need to feed at the parental trough past that age..
As a “conservative”, I pay my own medical bills..just like Rush and Levin.
There may come a day when I need major medical and for this, I have coverage. Otherwise, I choose to pay my own way and not be a burden to our already overloaded health care system. How ‘bout you, Charles?
My grown children have their own health insurance. They are all gainfully employed and have policies through their jobs.
Does that describe your “grown” children, Charles?
Your question is presumptive and leading on a couple of different levels. I'm not even going to try to tackle every angle I see in there.
I suppose I could answer, no, but with the qualifier that I am in the camp that believes that Romney only stands a couple of paces to Obama's right, and that he's a big government statist who will do nothing to roll back the current elitist agenda that's destroying this country.
A cursory look at his record as Governor of Massachusetts will better inform a person of what to expect from him as president, than anything else I can think of. He's never stood for anything resembling a conservative ideal in his life (campaign rhetoric, notwithstanding), and a solid case can be made that he is, in fact, a stealth liberal with an R velcroed to his sleeve.
The problem with a Romney presidency is that a Republican dominated Congress is going to try to "work with" him, instead of opposing him on his inevitable left-of-center agenda. All of this poppycock about 'holding his feet to the fire' is just that. He's already doing the etch-a-sketch, and no one's stopping him. Once he's in office - good luck. He'll do whatever he and his globalist buddies want, which won't bear any substantial difference to what Obama and his Socialist buddies have been doing for the last four years.
If you're one of those who's been promising that he's gonna fix Obama's mess, then you're one of those who's gonna get their heart broken. Especially if you've sold your conservative principles out, to support him.
On November 7th, I think the good news will be that Obama has lost, but the bad news will be that Romney has won.
I agree with you. I don’t want my state to mandate healthcare purchasing. Romney needs to use his head and keep the Federal government out of this. That’s all he needs to do as a Federal official.
But you know that stupid states like VT, MA, CA still retain the right under the Constitution to enact these type of stupid policies w/o Federal interference.
As long as the schools are Marxist indoctrination centers , and the media is controlled by the left , things will inexorably get worse . The country is more or less gone now , and you have all the politcos and their cronies grabbing what is left . Nearly 50% ov the voting public are idiots , and that # will continue to grow . Add in the illegals , etc...and you have a USA in name only . Heading for banana republic territory IMO .
Oh Chunga, your tagline is so clever and witty,. Are you describing yourself by chance?
nonsense, if NOBODY is compelled to buy it who cares? let the free market decide if it is a viable product.
YES, it is.
I find it humorous that the phrase "not reliable" would be used in a thread quoting Mitt Romney.
I could find quotes of Mitt Romney where he supports BOTH sides of almost every MAJOR issue.
I'm not going to go searching because I want Obama to lose. I am an ABO but PLEASE do not insult my intelligence and the intelligence of other Freepers.
The opposition did not just invent the term "etch a sketch" to describe Mitt Romney. They caught it as it was flung from Romney's own campaign.
You’re a lying moron...good riddance, buffoon
As someone who is chronically ill, that’s one of the more worrying parts of Obamacare. Will doctors not want to take me on because I’ll lower their stats? Will doctors drop me if I’m difficult and don’t exercise enough and don’t eat exactly as I’m instructed to? I shouldn’t have to even ask that question. This is why I hate socialized medicine. Maybe it makes fiscal sense, but I don’t think it does; I think it will end in the hardest patients having difficulty finding doctors, which will be more costly in the end.
The two specific parts Romney’s talking about keeping with his new plan are the under-26ers and the pre-existing conditions, because those are the biggest emotional ploys out of the whole thing that journalists can come up with. It’s not like he could have answered any other way.
You have another source? I don't believe ANYTHING from MSNBC.
If Mitt Romney said he will keep parts of ObamaCare, he was pandering to the left just like he did when he said he thought gays should be allowed in the Boys Scouts or when he said he never supported Reagan/Bush and would never try to go back to the Reagan/Bush years and like he did when he said he supports affirmative action.
Obviously Obama supporting MSNBC is NOT going to publish Romney's words where he says he will keep part of ObamaCare because the narrative at MSNBC is that "far right winger Romney" wants to take away all of ObamaCare, Woman's health, contraceptives and kill medicare.
Got another link?
A Progressive is as a Progressive does!
Another excellent reason why I’m voting for Sarah 2012!
The rest of you can go enjoy your collectivism the Founding Fathers hated with a passion by voting for Romney.
MR. ROMNEY: Well, of course not. I say we're going to replace Obamacare. And I'm replacing it with my own plan. And, you know, even in Massachusetts where I was governor, our plan there deals with pre-existing conditions and with young people. Everybody
GREGORY: So you'd keep that part of the federal plan?
MR. ROMNEY: Well, I'm not getting rid of all of healthcare reform.
Doesn't use the term "Obamacare" but you'd have to be incredibly dense or partisan not to understand what he says here. He has no intention of removing it all nor does he stipulate he'd stop at keeping only the three examples he gave.
I personally think he and the republicans want to use it as a rallying cry for their elections. The way they have abortion. I don't believe they are serious about removing either laws. Which is why I refuse to be dragged into supporting another liberal statist on the Republican ticket. Obama's marginally worse. Well isn't that precious. They've trotted out that damn line for decades as both parties find themselves culpable for it progressively being worse by the year. The Republicans look down upon my beliefs and principles just as the democrats do, it's just that the Democrats feel free to be open now that half of their base is as morally bankrupt as they are. Let Romney and co. go find people like them and see if they can cobble together enought for a majority. I'm staying out of the race since both disgust me.
Thanks in advance.
Mitt Romney knows exactly what he is saying at all times, he is an exceptionally careful speaker and has been trained for that from at least his teens.
That quote has been addressed in this thread multiple times. Try to keep up.
RE: It is the complete transcript. It’s your job to find one quoting him as saying “I want to keep parts of Obamacare.”
Video: Mitt Romney (in his own words): “Will keep parts of Obamacare”
(Found some other interviews he did today where he said the same thing)