Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

March 23, 2011

MAYBE ROMNEY SHOULD JUST STOP TALKING ABOUT HEALTH CARE POLICY.... Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) realizes he has a problem. He's running for president on his record, the highlight of which is a health care reform law that looks an awful lot like President Obama's Affordable Care Act. He can't run on a policy the GOP hates, and he can't abandon his only meaningful achievement in government.

So, Romney continues to scramble. Today, on the ACA's first anniversary, the unannounced presidential hopeful took to the pages of National Review to offer his latest vision of health care policy.

If I were president, on Day One I would issue an executive order paving the way for Obamacare waivers to all 50 states. The executive order would direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services and all relevant federal officials to return the maximum possible authority to the states to innovate and design health-care solutions that work best for them.

As I have stated time and again, a one-size-fits-all national plan that raises taxes is simply not the answer. Under our federalist system, the states are "laboratories of democracy." They should be free to experiment. By the way, what works in one state may not be the answer for another.

Oh, Mitt, maybe you should just stop trying.

First, if the goal is to sound less like the president, this probably won't help. A month ago, the White House announced that states that want to reach the same policy goals on their own, outside the ACA framework, were welcome to do so. Obama specifically told the nation's governors, "[I]f you can come up with a better system for your state to provide coverage of the same quality and affordability as the Affordable Care Act, you can take that route instead."

It sounds like Romney's executive order isn't altogether necessary. Obama has already endorsed the kind of state-based flexibility Republicans say they want. All states have to do is shape a plan that covers as many people as affordably and comprehensively as the Affordable Care Act does, without increasing the deficit. The "laboratories of democracy" are already free to do what Romney wants to help them be free to do.

Second, and just as importantly, Romney's new line is wholly at odds with his old line. As Greg Sargent explained today, "The problem for Romney, however, is that he has explicitly suggested that Romneycare should serve as a model for efforts to reform our health system on the federal level.... The plain truth is that Romney was proud of his achievement in Massachusetts, and thought it could -- and should -- help influence policymaking on the federal level."

Oddly enough, it did.

And third, Romney has to hope that the argument goes no further than the position he articulated in National Review, because if it does, it leads to an awkward conclusion. Jon Chait noted that Romney's argument, in effect, is, "Some states will choose health care systems that promote freedom, and other states will choose health care systems that destroy it, like, um, Massachusetts."

Steve Benen 4:25 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (9)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Republicans don't want states to innovate on healthcare. They want states to be able to say f-you to poor people, ditch Medicaid and leave millions uninsured while passing the savings on to the wealthy in the form of tax breaks. See? Problem solved!

Posted by: jonas on March 23, 2011 at 4:39 PM | PERMALINK

Last time I checked, veto power did not extend to bills signed by previous presidents.

Posted by: Grumpy on March 23, 2011 at 4:42 PM | PERMALINK

Romney seems to be threading a needle with lint. Still, it's the noise that counts, not any logical consistency or principled distinctions. Conservatives can build their church on a rock of dead parrots as long as they don't squawk too much.

Posted by: walt on March 23, 2011 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK

Is there some "law" that has prevented states from providing health care to its residents for the last two hundred odd years?
They issue fishing licenses, building permits, and provide police/fire protection to its citizens. Paid for by fees and taxes. And MANDATORY schooling. Seems a no brainer(- which should appeal to the GOP. . .)

Posted by: DAY on March 23, 2011 at 4:48 PM | PERMALINK

DAY said: They issue fishing licenses, building permits, and provide police/fire protection to its citizens. Paid for by fees and taxes. And MANDATORY schooling. Seems a no brainer(- which should appeal to the GOP. . .)

All of which the TeaRepLibs oppose. Well, maybe not the police as they think of them as magically appearing, like the military.

Posted by: martin on March 23, 2011 at 4:56 PM | PERMALINK

Romney Marsh is a lovely area in Southern England. It had a remarkable scarecrow that emigrated to the United States and served a term as governor of Massachusetts.

Posted by: tamiasmin on March 23, 2011 at 5:31 PM | PERMALINK

So, he wants to repeal Medicare?

Shame on you, Mittens.

Posted by: Steve on March 23, 2011 at 6:12 PM | PERMALINK

Dem attack ad for 2012: "Mitt Romney.. So desperate to be President he'd even deny being Mitt Romney".

Posted by: Mike on March 23, 2011 at 6:34 PM | PERMALINK

Mike,

We won't have to wait that long. I'm sure that will air during the Republican primaries.

Posted by: Steve on March 23, 2011 at 7:19 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly