Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Confirmed: Romneycare template for Obamacare

Confirmed: Romneycare template for Obamacare

I read the analysis below, and then I look at the hyperbolic rhetoric about how Mitt Romney is the most electable and Newt must be destroyed, and I just shake my head in disbelief.

Via James Pethokoukis:

It’s one thing when Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum say Romneycare was the inspiration for Obamacare. Such charges can be written off or minimized as political exaggeration. But how about when an academic study in Health Affairs, a peer-reviewed, health policy journal, says it. The publication just published an analysis of Mitt Romney’s health reform in Massachusetts. And as least for political pundits, this is the big takeaway (bold for emphasis):

Just as Massachusetts’s 2006 health reform legislation provided the template for the Affordable Care Act, so the state’s experience under that legislation provides an example of the potential gains under federal health reform.

Indeed, the whole point of the study is to try and forecast the impact of Obamacare by looking at Romneycare. Don’t be surprised if the research, conducted by professors from the University of Minnesota and Harvard, gets a mention at tonight’s GOP debate.

Tell me this is not happening.  How did we get here?

Update:  James Antle, III:

Obamacare and Romneycare are so tightly linked that not even a polemicist as gifted and persuasive as Coulter can separate them.

Michelle Malkin, Confirmed: Romneycare = Obamacare

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I SO don’t want this man to win the nomination.

Professor, excuse me, but your anger and panic are over the top. In fact, it resembles the mania we all witnessed during the Ann Coulter interview with O’Reilly.

The Elliot Abrams piece was posted at NRO on Wednesday at 4:00AM. Drudge (and every other news service and blog in the nation) did not post it until late Wednesday. Why are you dumping on Drudge for this particular piece of Newt-worthy news?

Or should that be newsworthy Newt?

This is what you get with a Newt, and if he is elected, I fear that the Presidency will continue to be all about Newt — rather than about the salvation of our country.

The last time a constituency was similarly over-the-top infatuated with a candidate to the extent that they did not want to see ANYTHING that burst their fantasy bubble…

…we ended up with an Obamanation.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to MerryCarol. | January 26, 2012 at 11:11 am

    Ah, the slippery slope logical fallacy. Nice.

    abenson229 in reply to MerryCarol. | January 26, 2012 at 11:17 am

    “The last time a constituency was similarly over-the-top infatuated with a candidate to the extent that they did not want to see ANYTHING that burst their fantasy bubble…”

    What candidate are you talking about? You can’t mean McCain (unless you’re a Palin hater, but of course she wasn’t the nominee) because he was the ultimate hold your nose and vote Republican candidate. Nobody was infatuated with McCain except the media. Unless Romney actually takes the nomination this time, then McCain will fall to second place in the hold your nose and do it category.

NC Mountain Girl | January 26, 2012 at 10:45 am

Attribute it to Obama Derangement Syndrome combined with Republican disease of giving the guy who came in second last time his turn.

In 2004 the Democrats were so besides themselves about removing the “illegitimate” George W. Bush they all bought into the meme that path to victory during wartime was a war hero candidate. They ignored every other signal that Kerry was an unlikable candidate with a weak record. This year the Republican punditry decided that in a poor economy a businessman was the ticket. Since most of them have zero business experience themselves they can’t distinguish between a genuine business and a financial chop shop like Bain. Nor do they understand the disdain so many business people have for operations like Bain. They are in love with their narrative so facts that contradict have no effect.

    “Financial chop shop”…I like that.

    I have been a stock market investor for over 40 years and most of the companies that private equity went after were mismanaged for years and needed new management but it soon became clear that their process was more like a bankruptcy proceeding outside of court. The pattern was always the same they would swoop in with piles of cash, take control , pay themselves a giant dividend to get their money back out, load the company with new debt, have an IPO, get another pile of cash and move on to another mismanaged company. Very often the company would soon be in trouble again because they could not service the huge debt. i kept track of them to avoid ever buying their stock. They never came back to the same company to repeat the exercise because the best parts were sold off in the first act.

Romneycare and Obamacare (Affordable Care Act) will end no differently than the Affordable Housing Act. Bankruptcy. Massachusetts has an interesting history not only for “affordable” healthcare, but in “affordable” housing.

StrangernFiction | January 26, 2012 at 11:04 am

How did we get here?

Corruption, a whole lot of corruption.

I hope that if the GOP insists on propping up Romney and he wins the nomination that the TEA Party will start a conservative alternative to the GOP and we can have a real choice in 2016. I don’t see what would be so bad about having a liberal party (Democrat) a moderate party (GOP) and a conservative party. I like the platform of the Constitution Party but they are most likely to “Christian” to get any real headway as a third party.

    Considering the history of the Constitution it makes logical sense that “Christian” would be highly active in this Constitution Party:

    “When writing the US Constitution, reliable evidence shows that the Framers relied on their understanding of political teachings, drawing from contemporary influences and past history. However, perhaps of equal importance, was the religious influence on the political writings of their time.

    “80 percent of the political pamphlets written in the 1770s and 1780s were written by ministers and when all references from the political writings of this time period are taken into account, a staggering 34 percent of references made are to the Bible. In fact, Deuteronomy by itself ranks as the most cited book during this era.” (American Political Thought)http://www.basicsproject.org/constitutional_literacy.htm

    Fascinating yes, that:

    “80 percent of the political pamphlets written in the 1770s and 1780s were written by ministers”

    So much for DEISTS!!!!111eleventy111!!!

scottinwisconsin | January 26, 2012 at 11:14 am

Hey Prof,

You’ve spent years working hard to build a credible site here. Balanced, objective.

Why have you chosen to throw that all way, just so you can defend a flawed, bi-polar, faux-conservative creep like Newt? (Don’t get me wrong — Mitt is evil too . . .)

YOU can’t actually effect the outcome of the primaries, but you certainly can (and have) knee-capped your own site with your obsession over defending Newt. (It’s just unpleasant to drop by here now.) We know the evil that is Newt. Your defense doesn’t change that.

We all know what it’s like to become so fixated that we start to hurt ourselves. You’re past that point, dude.

Wise up. Newt sure ain’t worth it . . . ask his ex-wives.

    LukeHandCool in reply to scottinwisconsin. | January 26, 2012 at 11:38 am

    In other words,

    Stupid, bad, stupid South Carolinians!!

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to scottinwisconsin. | January 26, 2012 at 6:32 pm

    Heh. Harmed this site? I lurked a long time before joining, and join I did when I finally saw somebody start standing up to Mitt Romney, and the “inevitability” and “electability” assumptions about him.

    Mitt is not electable. This country has been intensely groomed for the last three years by the Left and the obama administration to hate wealthy people and Wall Street types, a type that Romney epitomizes in both his holdings and appearance. Why else would obama, pelosi and other hard leftists voice support for the OWS slobs and thier “99%” BS? obama can’t run on his record. All he has is that he’s black, which has worn real thin, and that Mitt looks like a rich, white Wall Street guy. It didn’t matter that Kerry has about 5 times the wealth that Mitt has. That was then. This is now. Mitt LOOKS rich and is indeed rich, and that has been demonized and accepted as being bad and easy to hate by those obama has made poorer, which is a helluva lot of people who don’t read the fine print or don’t have enough brain cells firing for critical thinking or are willingly spoon-fed by the leftist media sharks circling in the moat.

    That leaves Newt or obama. Fish or cut bait, pal. Pick a side and work it. Oh. Maybe you already have.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to scottinwisconsin. | January 26, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    And one other thing…..Congreve was channeling Newt’s exes when he said, “Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned.” I couldn’t care less what those battleaxes say. They are severely BIASED and snarling, foaming, and champing at the bit for their lb. of flesh.

    A man would be considered a real cad if he came out at the eleventh hour against his ex-wife in an effort to deprive her of something honorable that she was seeking with all her might, but when a woman does it, fools give her sympathy instead of the disdain she deserves. No true gentleman, no true lady airs domestic laundry in this manner. It would only be reasonable to do if there was physical abuse against the former spouse or the kids, but no such allegation is even remotely present. Get over it. It isn’t selling. All divorces and almost all marriages have thier “issues.” In a civilized society, intimate issues in marriage remain private as long as laws aren’t broken and third parties aren’t civilly damaged.

StrangernFiction | January 26, 2012 at 11:17 am

“I hope we’re ultimately able to eliminate some of the differences [between Romneycare and Obamacare], repeal the bad and keep the good.”
http://usjf.net/2011/12/video-romney-admits-he-wont-end-obamacare/ (Starts at 1:40)

If you think Mitt Romney is committed to full repeal of Obamacare after watching this you are delusional.

    SF, I read that too. I have also read ,at a couple different sites, that the the consultants who worked on Romneycare were the who worked on Obamacare. This is a huge reason that I can NOT vote for Romney. I think this is the reason he has never apologized for this or admitted it was wrong.

scottinwisconsin | January 26, 2012 at 11:32 am

Remember how you knew BOTH Hilary and Barry were evil, 4 years ago? Each in their own way. But Evil.

So why can’t we open our eyes, and recognize that both Mitt and Newt are evil. Each in his own way. But Evil.

Each a faux-conservative, each lying thru his teeth, each desperate to be king.

It’s like we’re fighting over Hitler VS Stalin.

The only right answer is NEITHER.

    StrangernFiction in reply to scottinwisconsin. | January 26, 2012 at 11:41 am

    You are not very good at making distinctions, are you?

      scottinwisconsin in reply to StrangernFiction. | January 26, 2012 at 12:02 pm

      And if YOU think the differences between Newt and Mitt actually matter, you’re still asleep.

      Time to wake up.

      The country is going to entirely fall apart over the next couple years. Crashing GDP. Hyper inflation. Exploding unemplyment, 50% budget deficits. Wars and more wars.

      Neither Newt nor Mitt understand the causes, or have a clue how to do anything about it.

      If it all falls apart under Barry, then THEY (big government) get the blame, and things might change dramatically in 2017. Might.

      If it all falls apart under Newt Romney, then WE (limited govenment) get the blame, and things just get much worse in 2017. (see 1932)

      Since we’re not going to elect someone who would actually try to stop the bus before the cliff (Dr. Paul), let’s be sure Barry is at the wheel when it hits the bottom.

      Better a quick crash and then revolution (e.g. Atlas Shrugged), then a long slow decline into permanent tyranny, (e.g. 1984).

        how did I know ex-DR Paul was gonna be thrown into the mix.
        does he even maintain his med license anymore?
        you’d think with all the free time he has he should, not like he has done any real legislation in the decades he has been part of the problem.
        friggin kunicich code pink lover.

        “If it all falls apart under Barry, then THEY (big government) get the blame, and things might change dramatically in 2017.”

        I’ve been hearing that for for the last 20 years. No doubt, people will be saying it again 20 years from now.

      ScottinWisconsin trips from blog to blog trolling for Paul.

    Let me guess: Ron Paul supporter.

Speaking of ObamneyCare, I hope Newt administers a rhetorical enema on Mitt at the debate.

    StrangernFiction in reply to LukeHandCool. | January 26, 2012 at 11:46 am

    Everytime Romney questions Newt’s conservatism, Gingrich needs to bring up Romneycare and hit him mercilessly on it. Use Mitt’s own words to make the point that he is not committed to full repeal, and attack the taxpayer funding of abortions.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to StrangernFiction. | January 26, 2012 at 2:01 pm

      From my Things I’d Like To Hear file:

      Newt: “Well, governor, only two people in America have had socialist health care legislation named after them, and I ain’t one of ’em.”

NC Mountain Girl | January 26, 2012 at 11:49 am

The facts may actually be sinking in. NRO’s Jim Geraghty’s Morning Jolt e-mail newsletter today started with a long rant about how weak a campaign Romney has run so far and why a long primary cycle and a brokered campaign may be just what is needed to avoid being stuck with a stinker of a candidate. He picked up the rant part on his blog.

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/289314/if-it-aint-brokered-dont-fix-it

Maybe Coulter should read her own book on the mob mentality, and apply it to the gang of DC/NY establishment “conservatives”.

Romney’s mob keeps chanting about Newt …

“Good Newt Bad Newt”
“Newt is Unelectable”
“Newt’s attacking the free market”

Coulter says “over and over again, one finds the Democrats manipulating the mob to gain power. It is official Democratic policy to appeal to the least-informed, weakest minded members of the public.

Coulter, Ann (2011-06-07). Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America (p. 4). Crown Forum. Kindle Edition. ”

Reading this blog, and comparing sources to the Romney/Coulter/Christie claims, Ann’s description would fit the Romney campaign pretty well. Yet Ann has the audacity to claim it is the mass of Tea party people that are demanding a birth certificate. Sorry Ann, I don’t even know any “birthers”, but I have seen you saying if Christie doesn’t run, we’ll lose with Romney.

Maybe they have enough money to bury Newt’s message, but I’d sure rather hear something more honest. The strong minded read here and find a different story, and Mitt is hardly untouchable.

If Romney is the nominee of course I’ll vote for him, but we will get Romneycare on the state level, with federal funding.

I’m an ABO voter and I want to believe in Gingrich. But, I must say, the man scares me. Take, for example, his comments during the recent debate about fomenting revolution in Cuba. Come on, say you want to continue with the boycott and other actions of that sort. But, don’t start saying that you’ll support covert actions on the island with the intent of overthrowing the Castro regime. That may go over well with a segment of the Cubam emigrees in Florida but will be seen as reckless by many Americans. Gingrinch thinks of something and just seems to spout it out. His oversized ego is a big worry. I am not a fan of Romney but I am beginning to understand the worries I’ve heard expressed about Gingrinch’s potential for self-destructing.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to TPHobbit. | January 26, 2012 at 12:49 pm

    Newt does seem to just blurt things out at times.

    Reagan is a rock star, even though he did get the deficit spending ball really rolling. That may have been the gateway drug to the insane debt laden culture we are now mired in. But winning elections still means promising to give away more goodies. Reagan’s city was on a hill of debt, which is now mountainous.

    The DC people at the trough have the money to buy the next election most likely. The “cease and desist” order from the 2010 election has been ignored. There are no cuts, and only the tiniest of slow down in the increase. The Dem’ and Repub’ establishment are just fighting over who gets the prime cuts, to feed their lobbyist tribes.

    I’m not sure Newt is giving more than lip service to the Tea party, but Mitt will give us Hillarycare. It took them awhile, but they finally got Republicans to run Democrats for president, while Democrats run far left radicals. Good grief.

    Reagan had his “scary” comments too. It comes with the turf of being a leader who speaks his mind rather than someone who consults the polls.

    “Answering a question [in April 1970] about New Left campus tactics before a meeting of the California Council of Growers in Yosemite, Reagan said: ‘If it takes a bloodbath, let’s get it over with. No more appeasement.’ Liberals howled with indignation. Assembly speaker Jesse Unruh, Reagan’s opponent for re-election that fall, said that Reagan ‘had forfeited any right to hold public office.’ Others complained that Reagan was actually inciting violence on campus. Even Reagan’s friends at National Review worried that ‘the potential for political disaster here is huge.'”
    Steven F. Hayward, The Age of Reagan: 1964-1980, pages 323-324.

“Tell me this is not happening. How did we get here?”

By rationalizing our way into compromising our principles for the phony virtue of “electability” (aka: the guy who is awarded the big establishment money). There is no such thing as “the lesser of two evils” and we can’t keep holding our noses to vote for people we know don’t share our views and principles.

You can’t be partly pregnant and sometimes honest. It takes us to places like where we are now. The world doesn’t make any sense because WE are not making any sense. We can at least change the latter. What is stopping us?

We need to stop defining situations as false dichotomies like Romney vs Gingrich and pretending that either would solve the “Obama” problem. It’s not an “Obama” problem. It is a corrupt and entrenched one-party establishment, the GOP is a big part of it and yet we keep rationalizing ourselves into voting for it because…..???????

    MerryCarol in reply to Pasadena Phil. | January 26, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    …..???????

    Anyone? Buehller?

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Pasadena Phil. | January 26, 2012 at 2:50 pm

    Ummmmmmm…… because she’s a witch! Er, wait, no.

    Because it provides the material necessary to keep blogs in business? OK, maybe not….

    The basic human instinct is competition for resources required to survive. American politics, dysfunctional at best, is the chosen process, and the alternative is violent anarchy. There isn’t a single call for improvement of ours or any political process that hasn’t been made constantly since the beginning of govermmental politics.

    Og: “Uggo not make good leader. Me make better leader.”

    Gorg: “Why?”

    Og: “Him born from wart hog. True story.”

    Gorg: “No!”

    Og: “True, true. Thunder goddess tell me. We need new leader.”

    Gorg: “Well, I’m with you, Og!”

Michelle Malkin and her sockpuppet site, HotAir, have been and still are two of the most effectively pro-Romney blogs out there. She and her minions savaged Rick Perry, and they continue to push anti-Gingrich stories at every opportunity. If occasionally a non-pro-Romney story slips past, it’s a minor miracle.

huskers-for-palin | January 26, 2012 at 9:52 pm

Egads!!!! Every RINO, political hack and wannabe from Romney’s surrogates is coming out of the woodwork. The Superpac ads in Iowa weren’t enough, the SC voters had other ideas and it’s all-or-nothing attack/attack/attack.

If the establishment had this must fervor towards Obama instead of Newt we might actually get somewhere.

After this campaign, there will be lots of people I’ll wither be turning off or saying “meh, he/she’s just a hack”.

This much is certain, if Romney gets the nod, I’m certain that Obamacare won’t be repealed.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend