-
Adieu, Adieu, Remember Me
March 25, 2011 | 38 comments
-
DeMint’s Defense of RomneyCare is Ignorant…And Dangerous
March 17, 2011 | 85 comments
-
McConnell Pushing Vote to Block the EPA from Regulating Carbon Emissions
March 17, 2011 | 9 comments
-
More Barbour on Afghanistan
March 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
House Passes Three Week Spending Bill
March 15, 2011 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Currently, the only people left defending the Massachusetts health care reform are liberals who want to see Obamacare passed … and Mitt Romney.
On Sunday, while the Senate debated a bill to have the government takeover the health care system, Romney went on CNN and argued that his state takeover of health care worked out quite well for Massachusetts. Asked by John King to respond to criticism offered by his likely 2012 presidential rival Tim Pawlenty about how spending exploded in Massachusetts after the implementation of RomneyCare, Romney responded:
I’m afraid facts are stubborn things, and the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation has taken a good look at the Massachusetts plan some three or four years after it was passed, and it is well within the original forecast. It’s about — a little over 1 percent of the state budget. And in fact, virtually all of our citizens are insured.
And there’s an important difference between what we did and what President Barack Obama is proposing. Number one, we solved our problem at the state level. Let states deal with the problem of uninsured individuals.
And, number two, we have no public option. There’s no government option. And what’s primarily wrong with the president’s plan is that he wants to get the federal government into the health insurance business. It’s going to require massive subsidies, a trillion dollars of costs down the road.
That is not the right way to go. Instead, let states solve this problem and let them find their own plans. And by the way, if other governors can come up with something better than I did, congratulations. We’ll copy one another. But the states should be the laboratories of our democracy, not a federal government, one-size- fits-all plan imposed by Congress.
This is problematic on so many levels that it’s hard to know where to begin, so I’ll just start with stubborn facts. As Cato Institute’s Michael Cannon noted about that Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation study Romney trotted out:
First, the “annual incremental cost” — $88 million — is not the total amount that the law added to the state budget each year, but the average increase from one year to the next. In other words, the total “cost from the state budget” in 2009 is not $88 million but three times that ($264 million).
Second, that average “incremental cost” assumes the state will cut payments to safety-net hospitals by $200 million next year. We’ll see about that. Safety-net hospitals are already suing the state for more money. Set aside those assumed savings, and the cumulative “cost from the state budget” for 2009 is actually $408 million.
On top of that, Romney keeps boasting that the problem with Obamacare is that it’s federal, but his plan imposed costs on the federal government through the expansion of Medicaid, as Cannon reminds us:
But the larger problem is that the “cost from the state budget” ignores 80 percent of the total cost of RomneyCare. As Widmer explains, state officials only have to scrape up about 20 percent of total new spending themselves. The federal government — which is to say, taxpayers in other states — kicks in another 20 percent through the Medicaid program.
Yet this cost to the state and federal governments does not include the cost of the law on the private sector as individuals and businesses were forced to comply with a series of new mandates. “That brings the total cost of RomneyCare to at least $2.1 billion in 2009,” writes Cannon.
And it’s pretty absurd for Romney to argue that his plan wasn’t a government takeover because there was no “public option.” Even if you eliminate the public option, you’re still left with legislation that forces individuals to purchase insurance or pay a tax, expands Medicaid, and provides subsidies for people to purchase government-designed insurance policies on a government-run exchange.
Romney is right about one thing. The states can be useful as laboratories of policy. Massachusetts has provided us with an example of a failed experiment in health care policy that should be a warning to all Americans as Democrats push to impose something similar on the rest of the nation.
View all comments (40) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Philip Klein
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/12/07/romney-still-defending-his-big
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Overheated Frauds and Fools
- Gerry Ford at 100
- Once Upon a Time in the West
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 4:12PM
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
B. Mull| 12.7.09 @ 12:36PM
I am incredulous that we are going to impose a failed system on the country as a whole. It will be even worse for us than it is for Massachussetts, which is a wealthy state with a concentrated health industry. When this plan arrives in the wide-open states of the south and west, all hell's going to break loose.
Paul in Orlando FL| 12.8.09 @ 10:04AM
You know, I am SSOO sick of politicians and the Feds I could puke! No matter what we do or say, they continue to ignore what the people want! They feed on the poor by promising them things for free to get their support, meawhile us, the taxpayers are completely ignored and expected to pick-up the tab.
It is time to shut them down to the very minimum required and have the States take back the power. It (the power) belongs to each State and their citizens and NOT the Feds. I URGE everyone to let your Governor know how you feel and put pressure on the Feds to BACK OFF! We (the States) have the power to tell them to buzz off. If something is not done soon, we are surely looking at a revolt against the Feds!
Get off your butts people and tell them like it is! Demand that the State decide what is best for their people.
JennieWalsh| 12.9.09 @ 6:14PM
Where have all the jobs gone? They have gone into extinction with all the businesses and industries that have been taxed and regulated into extinction by blood-sucking, bone picking bureaucracies, the con-men who are taxing and spending America into annihilation. Communism creates poverty and suffering for the people and wealth and power for those bureaucrats in control. The National HELLth care proposals are communist/socialist poisonous death for the American economy, businesses and industry. Why are the American people so gullible? One of the main reasons is the communist/socialist- governmental/bureaucratic control of education.
NO NEW TAXES! NO NEW BUREAUCRACIES! The American heroes of today are those who eliminate all the bureaucracies and all the oppressive taxation and expose and bring to justice all the traitors in government who are waging legislative WAR against America. America's enemies know exactly what they are doing. They are extremely clever and devious. Communist/socialist legislation and laws are their tools of destruction. They must be brought to justice for TREASON-no small crime.
JennieWalsh| 12.9.09 @ 6:19PM
Check out Michael Badnarik who is running for President on the Libertarian Party. He is the president of the Continental Congress 2009. You can view his constitutional classes and watch the Continental Congress proceedings on video at givemeliberty.org
JennieWalsh| 12.9.09 @ 6:28PM
In my opinion, only total fools will vote for any Republican or Democrat for president again. The Republican Party had a golden opportunity to back an honest and intelligent candidate and true patriot and statesman, Ron Paul. They worked against Ron Paul, revealing their true colors as traitors, America's enemies. Both main parties are owned and controlled by America's enemies, as is also, the mainstream media.
Alice| 12.7.09 @ 1:02PM
Mitt does not believe in an apology, does not believe in owning up to his mistakes. Romney does believe in blasting anyone and everyone who he wants to defeat.
Never vote for a man who cannot give an apology, when they were wrong, or made a maladjustment --
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.7.09 @ 2:17PM
Well, Mitt and Newt have both stepped on their ...........................................tongues, now.
Hmmmmm, Sarah keeps looking better and better.
...and she can shoot straight. heh.
Declan| 12.7.09 @ 4:31PM
Sarah Palin as nominee = maybe one-third of the electorate. In other words, an Obama landslide. If Obe could pick whom he would run against, it'd be a toss-up between Sarah and Huckabee. Yawnplenty, er, Pawlenty would be in third place, that is, if anyone knew he existed.
Certain of our republican figures of the day need to improve their game on matters that extend past cultural identity. We are the most diverse nation on the planet and we have now over 300M citizens. And moderates and independents do matter. This isn't a contest to get aired on Rush Limbaugh's show. The fact is that W. won moderates and indies in 2000 and 2004, and Obama won them big in 2008. Palin and Friar Huck are divisive. They lag Obama big in moderates. Romney already beats him among moderates. I'm sorry, but that's just reality. If we're going to win elections, you have to be reasonable. That doesn't mean being unprincipled, but it does mean not being a kneejerking, permasqwaking doctrinalist.
LASTMANSTANDING | 12.8.09 @ 10:10AM
First of all, I have travel extensively though out most of this country. It is my observation that conservatives out number liberals 3 to 1. So it is not about expanding the tent to take in traitors to the conservative cause, (ie. G.W.B.) THEY ARE NOT NEEDED FOR A CONSERVATIVE WIN. Now do not get me wrong, I applaud W's stand in Iraq, he could and should have done more in Afganistan. However he acted liberal in following Bernanspend Paulson. He did fail to follow through when he questioned the path Fannie an Freddie where taking in 05. He should never have listened to Barney, Chuck and Chris. A real conservative, Palin for instance would kick butt if she started running now and picked a good running mate. Pick that person now and make it a twofer in the primaries. I know that ain't the way its done but we sure need some change from what we got. And yes it means just what you said, someone with Principals, Honesty, and that thing lacking in most government positions, common sense. Don't need moderates and independents will follow great leadership.
James| 12.7.09 @ 3:12PM
Phillip Klein:
Your article is full of non-sequiturs.
From another article more on point than Klein’s:
http://www.politico.com/news/s.....Page2.html
“Some in Massachusetts have stepped up to defend Romney, agreeing with the former governor that cost estimates are in line and blaming current Democratic state leadership for any growth in the price tag. So far though, Romney has few defenders on the national level.
“The major public criticism, false though it may be, is that it’s breaking the bank and that it’s unaffordable and that hasn’t been the experience,” said Michael J. Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, which recently released a study defending Romney. “The Massachusetts plan has been criticized from both the left and the right, whether it’s Howard Dean or David Brooks.”
“The left and the right have been critical of the Massachusetts experiment because nobody thought any state could achieve universal access without violating ideological principles,” Widmer said. “Really from the very first moment the bill was signed you’ve seen all these interests working to make sure the bill is portrayed as a failure.”
Klein, really, you ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Declan| 12.7.09 @ 4:23PM
“The left and the right have been critical of the Massachusetts experiment because nobody thought any state could achieve universal access without violating ideological principles,” . . . which is how you know it's good legislation.
James| 12.7.09 @ 3:20PM
Klein wrote:
"forces individuals to purchase insurance or pay a tax, expands Medicaid, and provides subsidies for people to purchase government-designed insurance policies on a government-run exchange. "
Right now, EVERY CITIZEN pays for health care for the uninsured. It's both a tax and a penalty.
When are Republicans going to confront real care reform?
When are Republicans going to be consistent with their RELIGIOUS values?
Once again, many Republicans are lining up on the wrong side of Health Care.
Romney has the right position on this issue. Here's the logic:
1. States are already paying for health care of the uninsured, through state programs.
2. States impose a tax on citizens to pay for these programs.
3. Citizens are paying for the tax.
4. Taxes are obligatory.
5. Therefore, RIGHT NOW, YOU are being FORCED to pay a tax to cover the health costs of uninsured citizens.
With many people losing their health coverage because they lost their jobs because the economy slowed due to greed, failed Bush policies, and Democratic spending, the scales are going to tip in Romney's favor on this one.
Why? Because he holds the correct political and moral position on this issue.
Remember, you're already paying for the "health care" of others under our current system.
LASTMANSTANDING| 12.8.09 @ 10:26AM
You are right in many of your observations, in MA. bailing out the hospitals uninsured costs to the tune of over 400 million per year from those taxes, by supplementing those with lower incomes to afford health insurance it cost less than giving the money to hospitals. The other costs are going to be there regardless. Also there is one other factor not mentioned here. I myself had just changed employers when I had a heart attack. I was not covered by insurance. But an employer I had worked for six years previously, an I admit it was for 22 years, so we were actually good friends,
paid my hospital bill out of his pocket. $187,696 dollars. Thank you again John.
James| 12.7.09 @ 3:27PM
Phillip Klein:
You wrote:
"Currently, the only people left defending the Massachusetts health care reform are liberals who want to see Obamacare passed ... and Mitt Romney. "
And what about the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation?
This foundation is an independent, non-partisan organization that provides unbiased research on state spending, tax policies and the Massachusetts economy.
Why didn't you include this in your article?
Are you this inept at finding the "facts" in every article you write?
Declan| 12.7.09 @ 4:20PM
James, don't forget that the Heritage Foundation also is a supporter of the reforms Romney signed into law in Massachusetts.
Hmm...let's see....Heritage or Phil Klein? ? ? ? ?
B. Sabin| 12.8.09 @ 4:03PM
I'm not a Ph.D mathematician but from where I'm sitting Phil's numbers don't add up? How did he get from $408 million to $2.1 billion?!! I was born at night but not last night! I'm a conservative and that also means I'm a sceptic even of other conservatives. I don't want a "public" health plan but we have to be careful that our arguments make sense! Phil, please try again!
DECLAN| 12.7.09 @ 4:18PM
This American conservative (I, Declan) is still defending MA health care reform. Why? Because it is pointless to lie and demonize its successes in an attempt to defeat the public-optioned Obamacare.
The fact is that the costs of the MA plan has always been between just 1-2% of the state budget. 98% are insured. Of polled participants, rich and poor alike are content with the system. This is all without a public option or new taxes. And it was done during a period in which the state economy was very poor, and the state deficit was over $3Bn dollars. Over one term as Governor, which ended in surplus.
If Gov. Deval Patrick cannot figure out how to prioritize state spending, then maybe state residents should vote in fewer Democrats as a general rule.
Republicans and conservatives should be open-minded and informed about the state of affairs in regard to all matters, but especially as it pertains to the health care system in place in Massachusetts. Simply being doctrinally opposed to anything short of evil is a sign of a lack of intelligence, the very thing that doomed us in 2008 where we had a field of candidates trying to disqualify each other on stupid checklist matters. If the climate of our primary in 2008 were alive in 1980, Reagan wouldn't have been nominated becaus, why, that guy committed the ulitmate flip-flop when he changed political parties! Plus, Friar Huck would've been crying tears of blood because Ronald wasn't always a pro-Life crusader. And look, look, he divorced his first wife, who had children, omg....how can he be trusted, you would've said in your little blog.
watchinitall| 12.7.09 @ 4:46PM
The writer pretends that the uninsured in your State receive no care at no one's expense. Do any of you readers believe that? You know better. The writer is equating mandated private insurance with government take-over of medicine. Do any of you buy that? I drive a car and I have to pay insurance because it is immoral to expect others to accept the cost of the risk I incurr by driving, and there are laws that require me to bear my share. It's just good policy, and fair to everyone. I don't like it that my tax dollars subsidize freeloaders. When an uninsured person gets sick and goes to the hospital, it is entirely tax dollars that get spent, not private insurance. Except in Massachussetts.
brock| 12.7.09 @ 6:20PM
Here, here.
Pingback| 12.7.09 @ 4:53PM
Key Points That Must Be Taken Into Consideration By Forex … | Investment Finance Wisd links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Susan| 12.7.09 @ 10:05PM
Philip Klein needs to talk with Romney in person and share his facts. This go between stuff doesn't cut it. He said, she said, they said.....something important is getting lost in the mix
andy | 12.7.09 @ 10:14PM
Keep healthy!
Hot sale MBT shoes
Amy| 12.8.09 @ 2:10AM
I like Tim Pawlenty – but I’m with Romney in 2012!
Pingback| 12.8.09 @ 9:58AM
The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Romney Still Defending His … Abbey by about links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 12.8.09 @ 10:00AM
The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Romney Still Defending His … American Me links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Bob| 12.8.09 @ 12:41PM
Flush the current bills! Tweak Massachusetts to get the costs down, get it right, then implement nationwide. No need to create 50 new gov agencies! Simple.
BOSMAN| 12.8.09 @ 12:54PM
I own a mid-sized business in MA. When Romney was Gov, My taxes went down and my employees premiums went down as well. Romney didn't stay long enough to tweak out any unforeseen problems. He vetoed the goodies that the MA legislature added LATER under Governor Patrick. The supposed problems with Romney's health care program in MA are attributable to the changes made by the new governor - who has bloated it, over-regulated it and applied it to illegals. The cost of Romney care is less than 1.3% of the States budget. Patrick has chosen not to make Healthcare a Priority. If he would, the 1.3%, would be even less. Ma fiscal problems are a result of Patrick. He spends money like a kid in a candy store. In addition, Romney has stated that Individual states should determine health care issues in their states. This should not be mandated by Washington. a study was done recently shows that MA RESIDENTS still like the system. It seems MA HEALTH CARES biggest critics, DON'T LIVE IN MA!
ROMNEY / DeMINT in 2012!
Gadema korboi Quoquoi | 12.8.09 @ 1:51PM
Without Healthcare Reform, how do We Contained our SkyRocketing Healthcare Spending?
Healthcare Reform offers, once in a life time Opportunity, for us to used some Stimulus Funds to Build Smart/Intelligent Infrastructure Services for: Transportation Systems, Smart Grids, Heallthcare IT, and Broadband. This Investment will Enabled New Jobs Creation and Economic Recovery.
Proper Deployment of Heallth Information Technology (HIT) Solutions and Training will Incrreased Productivity (i, e, medical data mining/warehousing, risks treatment, service delivery), Efficiency (i, e, medical errors, redundant and inappropriate care), and have a Costs Savings of around 20-30% of our Annual National Healthcare Expenditures (2008, $2.5 Trillions).
The Engine of Economic growth in this 21st Century is "Broadabnd." We can start by, Deploying a purre Packet-based, All Optical/IP, Multi-Service National Transport Network Infrastructure, using Optical Ethernet throughoout this National "Network of Networks." This can then Connect All Optical Islands, Nationwide.
The Investment in this Next Generation "Network of Networks", in addition to New Jobs Creation and Economic Recovery, can also Serve as a Business Driver for: e-Healthcare, e-Commerc, e-Education, Energy Systems, Transportation Systems, Sociaal Networking, Entertainment, etc.
This type of Investment is like the Investments that were made in the past, in Electrification of Rural Areas, and in the National TransportationInter-State Highways, which Increased Productivity and our GDP.
Please See: www.gkquoquoi.blogspot.com for Summary Deployment Plan, for the Nationwide Health Information Network (NHIN).
Gadema Korboi Quoquoi
President & CEO
COMPULINE INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Pingback| 12.8.09 @ 10:34PM
The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Romney Still Defending His … Acid by about links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 12.8.09 @ 10:34PM
The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Romney Still Defending His … Acid by about links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Ron| 12.8.09 @ 11:28PM
Mitt Romney is the ONLY person qualified to get us out of our financial nightmare. Sara Palin, is NOT, she is a neophite. She make OBAMA look like a genius. Huckabee is a dishonest oportunistist who hides behind religion. He is also a neophite and unqualified. Newt Gingrich is an Adulterer and although a career Polititian who knows how to make deals, we need someone who is more of a role model. Mitt Romney is the only choice.
Pingback| 12.9.09 @ 3:04AM
The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Romney Still Defending His … Federal Me links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 12.9.09 @ 7:17AM
Oh Good, a Thoughtful Debate on Healthcare, Ctd « See First Blog links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 12.9.09 @ 7:44AM
No Captain? No Problem! : Smart Girl Nation links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 12.9.09 @ 1:30PM
Action For Better Healthcare | Massachusetts healthcare plan in trouble links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
W.P Koch| 12.12.09 @ 11:54AM
WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN
Congress and the White House should stop squandering the people’s money first to improve quality of basic entitlements. No new taxes. Citizens come first.
It is time the U.S. limits its human rites and military policeman by lobbying the United Nations and NATO to “take on more”. 800 bases across the world should be reduced. Starting with Iraq, remove most troops in 2010 and continue consulting for self reliance. After a surge in Afghanistan repeat, remove corruption and substitute same value food crops for drugs. Reduce forces in selected areas such as Germany, Bosnia and Okinawa.
Cut bureaucracy. For example, combine CDC, EPA and FDA. No CSZARS.
Contribute to one of: The World Bank or International Monetary Fund.
Reduce foreign aid. For example, no aid to oil rich -Iraq.
Reduce the “stimulus” by halting “vote buying” and ridiculous earmarks. Examine 887 billion. Please--no research of frogs or rats and no private jets for Congress.
Reduce medical costs by “tort reform”, and limiting “red tape”.
Stop the “bailout”. Let executives lose. “To big to fail” is obsolete.
Enforce immigration laws. Entitlements or benefits are for citizens. Deport criminal “illegals”. Workers with visas should receive only needed medical benefits.
Improve medical expense tax deduction for citizens reaching age 65. Provide employer tax incentives for employee healthcare.
Full funding will support “Medicaid”,” Medicare”, and “Veteran’s Affairs”.
Healthcare quality should be at least that for Congress or the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). A result: no drug “benefit hole”, dental coverage, improved visual coverage and no co-pays except for extended skilled level nursing.
The savings can aid unemployment compensation, and stabilize Social Security.
Trackback| 12.25.09 @ 1:33AM
massachusetts credit repair, on massachusetts credit repair, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
racking | 1.7.10 @ 12:33AM
http://www.racking-shelving.com
http://www.cold-store-equipment.com