If Romney gets Republican nomination, will he renounce Mass version of Obamacare?

[Little-Acorn]

Ron Paul came in first in the straw poll just held at CPAC. But though Paul has many excellent ideas, his insistence that since Congress has not declared war in Afgh or Iraq we must pull all troops out immediately, shows he cannot be a serious candidate.

Romney came in second. His business background is excellent, salvaging the Olympics from disaster when he was the OC's chair. But the huge red flag in his background, is that he is the one who implemented universal gotv-run health care in Massachusetts - a program which is predictably bankrupting the entire state. His defense is that, while Univ HC is wrong for a country, it's OK for a state. While technically a state UHC system doesn't violate the US Constitution the way Obamacare does, it's still a weak argument, considering its imminent disaster status.

I guess Romney can't just ditch his major project without pissing off the Mass liberals. But if he gets the Republican nomination, might the Mass liberals become less important to him? Any Presidential candidacy by him, is doomed to failure if he keeps insisting Mass's failing health care system is "good" thing. Might he finally start acknowledging what everyone else already know - that any universal health care system run by ANY government, is unworkable... if he finds himself the Republican nominee?

[fj1200]

Why would he care about Mass libs?

But yes, it's a problem that he'll have to deal with.

[Mr. P]

I don't think Ron Paul has a snowballs chance. Big mistake unless the goal is to repeat 08'. Romneys only option is to admit HC was a major mistake that shouldn't be repeated nationally, hey, he has the proof. My 2cents.

[DragonStryk72]

Ron Paul came in first in the straw poll just held at CPAC. But though Paul has many excellent ideas, his insistence that since Congress has not declared war in Afgh or Iraq we must pull all troops out immediately, shows he cannot be a serious candidate.

Romney came in second. His business background is excellent, salvaging the Olympics from disaster when he was the OC's chair. But the huge red flag in his background, is that he is the one who implemented universal gotv-run health care in Massachusetts - a program which is predictably bankrupting the entire state. His defense is that, while Univ HC is wrong for a country, it's OK for a state. While technically a state UHC system doesn't violate the US Constitution the way Obamacare does, it's still a weak argument, considering its imminent disaster status.

I guess Romney can't just ditch his major project without pissing off the Mass liberals. But if he gets the Republican nomination, might the Mass liberals become less important to him? Any Presidential candidacy by him, is doomed to failure if he keeps insisting Mass's failing health care system is "good" thing. Might he finally start acknowledging what everyone else already know - that any universal health care system run by ANY government, is unworkable... if he finds himself the Republican nominee?

Well, actually, he's correct. It's sort of a "shit or get off the pot" sort of thing, so either Congress needs to grow a pair, or we need to get out. It's clearly turning into another Vietnam Wa- Oh, I'm sorry, "police action", or the Korean "police action". Sick and tired of that shit.

Congress, and the Fed in general, are getting away with far too much these days, and we do need a man in the office who will start forcing them to actually abide by the rules.

[Thunderknuckles]

I think he will be able to spin it easily enough. The fact is Mass's economy has done a lot better than any other state during the recovery, it's a great state to do business in and its universal health care system isn't in that bad a shape. They're facing a budget gap of 1.9 billion between what they take in and what they need to spend on services which will probably be resolved with the coming budget cuts they are implementing. All in all not bad, not great, but not bad.

So, he has some positives to focus on and spin it his way.

I think it will be a strength for him going against Obama as he can point out how he did universal health care better than Obama did.

One thing is for sure, he won't hide from his health care plan. He will own it and focus on every positive he can. He has no choice.

[Thunderknuckles]

Forgot to mention he will probably blame any current budget woes the state is facing on it's current democratic governor.

[Supposn]

Well, actually, he's correct. It's sort of a "shit or get off the pot" sort of thing, so either Congress needs to grow a pair, or we need to get out. It's clearly turning into another Vietnam Wa- Oh, I'm sorry, "police action", or the Korean "police action". Sick and tired of that shit.

Congress, and the Fed in general, are getting away with far too much these days, and we do need a man in the office who will start forcing them to actually abide by the rules.

DragonSstryk72, when Romney was governor of Massachusetts he signed off on the existing federal health plan before there was an existing federal health plan.

I strongly doubt if Romney could get the Republican nomination. Unless the Supreme Court overturns it, no party or faction will be able to decrease the federal health plan that was passed.

If the Republican Party makes a serious attempt to do so, they will not elect a president until 2036 at the earliest and I expect that they’ll be out in the cold for many presidential terms beyond 2040. I expect U.S. universal health insurance within my children’s lifetime. (I’m 74 years old).

Respectfully, Supposn

[DragonStryk72]

DragonSstryk72, when Romney was governor of Massachusetts he signed off on the existing federal health plan before there was an existing federal health plan.

I strongly doubt if Romney could get the Republican nomination. Unless the Supreme Court overturns it, no party or faction will be able to decrease the federal health plan that was passed.

If the Republican Party makes a serious attempt to do so, they will not elect a president until 2036 at the earliest and I expect that they’ll be out in the cold for many presidential terms beyond 2040. I expect U.S. universal health insurance within my children’s lifetime. (I’m 74 years old).

Respectfully, Supposn

Um, I was addressing the comment on Ron Paul. As to the "Federal Health Plan", see the other threads where states are striking it down. You can't mandate health insurance. And where in holy hell do you think we're getting the money for this universal health coverage? How much more money are you willing to pay for this, and force every single person to pay along with you? What we need is to hold the insurance companies liable, but no, let's create a massive cluster-fuck of Obamacare. That'll make everything better.

Also, as another point, Texas also did fantastically during the meltdown of the economy, and they didn't take any bailout money.

[Supposn]

DragonStryk72, I’m aware of small enterprises where no employee can avail themselves of subsidized group rates and the principles are often uninsured during periods of lapsed insurance payments. Payroll has to be the first consideration.

How long can our nation continue to tolerate this?

I wouldn’t bet on the Supreme Court upholding or overturning mandatory personal insurance but if it’s overturned, (regardless of which party has the majority of both houses after 2012), overturning the mandatory insurance provision may hasten the emergence of federal universal health insurance.

I think this country will then be ready to fully or partially fund Medicare for all age groups with a general federal consumption tax. That would be the first step for later incrementally and simultaneously replacing portions of incomes taxes with the general sales tax.

Respectfully, Supposn