-
Anyone Still Believe Me?
May 21, 2013 | 38 comments
-
What Those Who Boycott Israel Really Want
May 14, 2013 | 143 comments
-
Mitt on Marriage
May 8, 2013 | 38 comments
-
The One Constant
May 1, 2013 | 118 comments
-
Trudeaus and Terrorism
April 22, 2013 | 15 comments
A Further Perspective
Meandering Mitt
Romney must give Americans a choice on health care.
The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Obamacare has come with side effects both positive and negative.
The most positive side effect has been response of conservative activists, especially with the rejuvenation and remobilization of the Tea Party. You can be sure that the Tea Party will see to it that Obamacare remains front and center during the 2012 presidential election given that the Supreme Court has seen fit to view Obamacare as a tax. After all, the Tea Party was formed because we’re “taxed enough already.” If Obamacare could motivate voters to toss out Democrats in the House and Senate in 2010, then it could very well motivate voters to do the same with President Obama in November.
Unfortunately, this brings me to the most negative side effect of the Supreme Court decision — Mitt Romney’s response to it. During the GOP primaries, when Romney was asked about the difference between Obamacare and Romneycare in Massachusetts, he would argue that his plan was constitutional. Well, now that the Supreme Court has spoken Romney can no longer make that claim and it seems to have caught his campaign off guard, as illustrated by Romney advisor Eric Fehrnstrom’s painful attempts to explain why the Obamacare mandate was a penalty and not a tax. On FNC’s Special Report with Bret Baier, Charles Krauthammer said, “What Romney ought to say is “OK, it’s a tax.” Well, Romney has taken a dose of Dr. K’s prescription and has now said that the Obamacare mandate is a tax after all.
However, this won’t be the last time Romney is asked about health care during this campaign. Even if voters consider the economy a more a pressing matter, it isn’t like the economy and health care are mutually exclusive. As it stands now, Obamacare is the law of the land and will stay so if President Obama is re-elected in the fall. If Obamacare is implemented, it will have consequences for both the health of Americans and the health of the American economy. At this point, the only recourse Americans have to prevent the implementation of Obamacare is to defeat its namesake at the polls. However, we can’t escape the fact that Romney implemented a health care plan in Massachusetts with an individual mandate. Nor can we escape the fact that Romney said he likes mandates and probably still does. Romney can’t change his political past, but he can define his political future and reframe the issue. The best way he can do that is by offering Americans a choice where it concerns our health care.
Simply put, Romney must put forward an alternative to Obamacare. While Paul Ryan and Ron Wyden have good ideas when it comes to reforming Medicare, it won’t be sufficient for Romney merely to embrace their bi-partisan efforts. Romney must put his own stamp on health care. The centerpiece of Romney’s plan ought to be to allow health insurance companies to compete across state lines. Not only could Romney argue that this would lower the cost of health care, but he could argue that his plan would give Americans more options with health insurance. Romney could say something along the lines of, “My plan would give Americans the opportunity to buy the health insurance plan of their choice. President Obama’s plan forces Americans to buy health insurance plans they don’t want.”
By making choice and competition the centerpiece of his health care plan, Romney can make the case that it won’t be necessary for his administration to issue waivers because no one will be compelled to buy health insurance they don’t want. Romney could also make an issue of the Obama Administration issuing waivers to the SEIU and other organizations that advocated for Obamacare. He could argue, “If Obamacare is so fantastic, then why do the very people who advocated it want no part of it? And if they want no part of Obamacare, then why should any other American?”
In the week following the Supreme Court’s decision on Obamacare, it has been Romney and not Obama who has been on the defensive. It ought to be the other way around, and it can be if Romney so chooses. All he has to do is present Americans with a health care plan that is better than Obamacare. How difficult can that be?
About the Author
Aaron Goldstein writes from Boston, Massachusetts.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (36) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Aaron Goldstein
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/06/meandering-mitt
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Appleby| 7.6.12 @ 6:47AM
Perhaps the Romney worshippers who post here could start drafting speeches to make what looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck -- into a patriot eagle. Five months is not enough time to fool all of the people, but perhaps you can bully enough people into thinking the only choice they have is to vote for Romney no matter what he stands for or says.
I will concentrate on getting the Senate into Republican hands and hope that whatever ends up President can at least be steered.
Drunken Sailor| 7.6.12 @ 11:13AM
I take it you can't multitask and do both? I still can't get why you think letting Obama stay in office is manageble. It's not like he obeys the laws he dosen't like afterall.
Al Adab| 7.6.12 @ 11:33AM
Like a drunken sailor (not yourself) Romney staggers from one position to another. This is the personification of exactly what is wrong with the GOP. It is adrift, cut off from principle and seeking only the wind to carry it toward a course. It promises better management of the welfare state, but does not question the legitimacy of the statism which follows. When the Conservative Movement was born, it promised "A Choice not an Echo". Where is that promise today?
Drunken Sailor| 7.6.12 @ 2:03PM
Not arguing with you but the way I see things currently we have two options. Continue the present course or change captains and give them a shot. When your approaching a economic waterfall and the man and the helm keeps telling your "everything is fine" or "this is step in the right direction" over job numbers that don't even keep up with population growth, then I say it's time for a little Mutiny.
Romney was not and is not my first choice but he is the choice we have as a new captain.
You go to war with the team/supplies/situation you have, not the one you would ideally want.
Al Adab| 7.6.12 @ 3:40PM
Exactly so. What choice do we have? Nonetheless, this wing of the GOP has led us to defeat time and again. Remember the end of Tom Dewey? A young firebrand named Everett Dirksen looked Dewey in the face in 1952 and said, "Twice we followed you to defeat. We willl not follow you again." If twice was too many, how many times following after "what choice do we have" candidates is too many? Add to that the fact that so many unaligned, uninformed voters need a reason to change horses because they prefer the devil they know and we ask when and how Romney will prove himself more than marginally different from Obama.
Drunken Sailor| 7.6.12 @ 4:09PM
Al,
Value your input dearly, but unfortunately this time is not like the others. Any other election in the past and I could have easily understood people setting out the election. This, I believe, is the exception. The GOP party will not get one dime or slighest bit of sweat from me until the move back to their core values. I will give Romney my vote grudgingly and do my damndest to push individual conservated into positions below him. We can either try to force him into more conservative positions or we can throw in the towel, get drunk, and say what the hell. I refuse to go down without a fight.
Didn't like or vote for Obama as a Illinois or US Congressmen. Saw him for what he was. Was amazed he made it where he did but I will be damned if I let the US get steamrolled into nation in the Chicago/Detroit image without at least a effort.
Those who sit at home and sit this one out are whistleing past the graveyard. How are they going to feel if Obama wins and pushes us into a European socialist country type situation? I lived there, saw its healthcare firsthand. Saw how slow anything got done. The high levels of alcholism. The high levels of drug use and unemployment. Learned quickly if you wanted something, you tried the black market first. Don't want to see the US become like that.
Al Adab| 7.6.12 @ 6:49PM
D/S:
Please don't misunderstand me. I do not intend to sit it out, but many, especially unaligned voters, will or will simply stay with what they know. This however is a lesson the GOP needs to learn and to hear often. We are tired of following accomodationists to defeat. Unless the Party finds its spine, seriously lacking among the "moderates" enthusiasm will lag and failure follow. Have a great weekend.
Occam's Tool| 7.8.12 @ 2:06AM
"I will repeal ObamaCare. I will sign legislation that will allow health insurance companies to have insurance sold across state lines. We will work with states to set up insurance cooperatives to cover sick people with pre-existing conditions on a sliding scale of premiums. We will work on tort reform like Texas to encourage physicians to reduce defensive medicine."
How hard is that?
Brookschwarzenegro | 7.6.12 @ 12:32PM
IMO Romney is popular mostly because he is handsome, he appeals to such as Brad Pitt's dingbat mother because of his movie-star looks and the fact he isn't Obama.
"A pretty face will last a year or two,
then we'll see what it is you can do..."
--'How Do You Sleep'
Brookschwarzenegro | 7.6.12 @ 12:34PM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.c.....nti-345647
Brookschwarzenegro | 7.6.12 @ 12:39PM
And look at Jane Pitt's eyes, she's high on Prozac or something:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.c.....tt_a_l.jpg
Doctor Right| 7.6.12 @ 2:14PM
Of course!
ALL people who plan on voting for Romney are mentally unstable!
I mean, they should place Conservatism onto the American Psychiatric Academy's list of personality disorders, right under Homosexuality.
Occam's Tool| 7.8.12 @ 2:08AM
Homosexuality isn't a disorder anymore, Dr. R. My colleagues voted on it. :-)
Brookschwarzenegro | 7.8.12 @ 6:45PM
And why is homosexuality no longer considered a disorder?
Because you have kin who are gay, that is reason #1. Being gay is wrong until your brother or sister, cousin, aunt, etc. comes out of the closet and then you discreetly do a 180 after a decent interval.
Occam's Tool| 7.8.12 @ 8:21PM
My sister is heterosexual, has been married over 20 years with two kids. She is a flaming Liberal wombat, and her kids are no prizes (last saw them six months ago). I wish she was homosexual with no kids.
That being said, I don't believe homosexcuality is normal, nor do I believe in gay mariage. However, I treat people who are acute Danger To Self/Others. It is possible that ego-dystonic homosexual urges and obsessions can lead to suicidal ideation, but I don't focus on ego syntonic homosexuality---I'm too damn busy. I shopuld also point out that in the handful of transgender cases that I have treated, the transgender issues were the cherry on top of much more severe psychopathology.
All this being said---marriage is the device through which we sublimate men's aggressive sexual urges into the service of society---how we create pillars of civilization from untutored young pups and provide optimally for children. It should not be thrown away.
Robert| 7.6.12 @ 6:57AM
Doesn't anyone see the sarcasm in Romney's remark that "it's a tax"? He specifically said he agrees with the dissenting opinion...that Obamacare is a penalty and thus unconstitutional. He merely is mockingly saying, 'what the Supremes say is a tax, IS a tax, no matter what anyone else thinks,' and it follows that the only remaining way to rid us this obamanation is to excise the cancerous malignancy occupying the White House!
We need a mastectomy on the radical!
Anthony| 7.6.12 @ 9:00AM
Blow this election Romney, and you and the D.C. establishment can kiss the Republican Party goodbye, same with the American Marxist Democrat Party. Can anybody say Bad Moon Rising?
What America needs is for Washington to be the American Atlantis and find itself under water, just as the recent British Atlantis was recently discovered.
Gee imagine that, Britian was made a island 6500 years ago by rising seas, with no Obozo and SUV's around. How could that happen!!!!
Quick, call Michael Mann and check his hockey stick graph.
canuckistani| 7.6.12 @ 11:17AM
Earth existed more than 6000 years ago?
Stop the presses, the flat-earthers on here may have to respond.
Doctor Right| 7.6.12 @ 2:15PM
How long has the earth existed?
Doctor Right| 7.6.12 @ 2:15PM
That would be the spherical earth...
Doctor Right| 7.6.12 @ 2:15PM
That would be the spherical earth...
Anthony| 7.7.12 @ 10:18AM
That would be you moron and your ilk. ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING, the 2nd greatest hoax purpetrated on mankind. Obozo would be the 3rd greatest hoax.
Oldefarte| 7.6.12 @ 11:28AM
Mitt Romney? What about the Democrats who shove this piece of garbage upon the American people? Replacement healthcare by Romney? Why? What about no replacement? What about the indigents in this country going to work and supporting themselves instead of the taxpayers being forced to do it? What about the elimination of all welfare, and telling them to either work for their sustenance or die? What about telling them to stop having children they can't afford to raise and to begin forcing the government to regulate births of same [or either if they choose to populate that which they cannot pay for, that the government and taxpayers will no longer support their needs in life]???????????
canuckistani| 7.6.12 @ 11:31AM
I recall reading many articles on "winability" versus rhetorical purity during primary season. It was a lively debate that ultimately concluded with Willard defeating a clearly dismal field that included hacks and clowns.
The error, it seems, was a discarding of past examples of dark horses or even bruised candidates being able to crystallize a movement against a weak president: RR and Slick Willie.
Both were suspected by the establishment and moneyed interests. Both were played on by the MSM. Both had skeletons in their closets that would be interred by a singular focus on the economy.
My debating teacher always hammered home the old saw: Do not accept the premise of the question and dictate terms.
Obamneycare should not and cannot be the central focus of the baggers and elites alike. It has to be the economy, and only the economy.
The GOP must fess up to their policy blunders of the past decades and demonstrate that recidivism is not ingrained and change is possible.
As we have seen, Willard stumbles badly when parsing his words around healthcare. Change the narrative now and refuse to accept the premise that the ruling is relevant at all. "2014 can be changed for the better - later, but jobs in 2012 and 2013 are the only priorities"
Jeffrey| 7.6.12 @ 4:44PM
Well said,
"It's the Economy Stupid" Still works today as it did in '92
Mike G| 7.6.12 @ 11:57AM
Romney will never put forth a plan of his own. It doesn't fit into his 'play-it-safe campaign.
Who Knows?| 7.6.12 @ 1:01PM
Another great article, today!
Thanks for writing my own thoughts, Mr. Goldstein.
Oldefarte| 7.6.12 @ 1:20PM
This is what should be written and discussed here, instead of this PRO-OBAMA crapola:
'....Newsmax.....With unemployment mired at 8.2 percent, President Barack Obama’s re-election bid seems much more distant.Payroll added an anemic 80,000 jobs for June, and the unemployment rate remaining unchanged. Economists predicted a 100,000 jobs gain, according to a Bloomberg report. Not counting government employment, the private picture looks grim — 84, 000 jobs were added — the lowest amount in 10 months. The president needs to track a steady upward trend economic improvement; a picture of stagnation and erratic down trends worsen his chances dramatically......'
Oldefarte| 7.6.12 @ 2:26PM
Try MEANDERING OBAMA next time please:
'....Today, Jay Carney fell into the unfortunate trap of attempting to explain President Obama’s view of Obamacare. If it’s a tax, President Obama’s signature plan is legal, but violates Obama’s campaign pledge not to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000 in a major way; if it’s a mandate, it’s illegal under the Supreme Court ruling. But the Obama administration wants it both ways: it’s a tax for purposes of legality, but a mandate for purposes of politics. Here’s how Carney expressed that ridiculous perspective:But if I could just add as a matter of policy, it is simply a fallacy to say that this is a broad-based tax. That's not what the opinion stated that was authored by the Chief Justice. The Affordable Care Act is constitutional under Congress's taxing authority, but this is clearly a penalty that affects less than 1 percent of the American population.This is asinine. Only taxes are authorized under the taxing authority of Congress. Mandates aren’t. The power to declare war isn’t. Taxing authority gives authority to levy taxes. Of course.
But Obama’s now stuck between a rock and a hard place. It took Mitt Romney a while to recognize the political opportunity in this, but he finally did yesterday when he labeled Obamacare a tax. Now Obama will be held to one standard or another. Either way, he loses.....'
Jeffrey| 7.6.12 @ 5:44PM
Aaron,
I decided to look into Gov. Romney's stance on health care and lo-n-behold, he is laying out everything you're requesting him to do. So I would recommend looking at what he has to say before presuming to know where he stands. Mitt is for allowing consumers to purchase insurance across state lines, please visit his website to find out more. www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care
PCPSmokerII| 7.6.12 @ 9:07PM
Were you not one of the ones pushing Romney during the primary?
ReaganConservative4ever| 7.7.12 @ 1:27AM
We tried to tell the Republican voters in the primaries about this dilema and conflict with Mr Obama-lite RINO Romney candidate against Obama. And that the best candidate that was running for the Nomination and office of President, and the most intelligent Reagan conservative, and the most aggressive ardent opponent against Obama would be Newt, or even Santorum, who would destroy Obama in any campaign, let alone in any debate.. and not Mr moderate progressive GOP establishment Republicrat RINO Romney, aka Obama-lite.
When will people ever learn.. Now we are in very situation that we warned about would happen with Romney..
If Romney happens to win the election this 6 Nov., it is not because Romney is so good as the best opposition candidate we have against Obama, it will be because Obama is so bad.
Kingofthenet| 7.7.12 @ 4:13PM
A Conservative alternative would be nice,m the ONLY problem is how Conservatives view their fellow Americans, this little video illustrates it best:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJIlCSBfksM
Conservatives are Daffy
Occam's Tool| 7.8.12 @ 2:09AM
Actually, Romney has a very detailed and useful website.
Kingofthenet| 7.8.12 @ 11:56AM
Yup, I especially like the part where Mittens PROMISES us more Judges like Roberts.
PHILLIPBERNAL| 7.8.12 @ 8:42PM
Regards healthcare, how about everyone pay for their own healthcare? Stop telling me that I must pay for someone else’s healthcare. It is morally wrong for the government to mandate that I or even my employer pay for another person’s healthcare. Regards the so-called poor, which is a euphemism for minorities, well guess what? This is America. Get an education, get a job, and pay for your own damn healthcare. It is called personal responsibility. What about old people? Well, they had an entire lifetime to arrange their healthcare. We are free citizens with rights AND RESPONSILITIES. I am obligated to take care of me, my spouse and children, and my parents in their old age. You want a solution? Get the government out of healthcare. My healthcare is none of the government’s business, period. The only place for government in healthcare is for the armed forces. Everything else will fall into place when the government is out of healthcare. Medicare and Medicaid will go away. Trillions saved right there. Government interference, incompetence, corruption, and non-accountability cease. Government will no longer regulate the health insurance industry. Health insurers will be thrown into a real free enterprise arena. Sink or swim baby. Churches will once again take their rightful places as providers of healthcare for the “poor”, “old people”, and the truly mentally or physically infirm as they once did before the gubmit got involved.