Home > Alex Massie

Friday 10 February 2012

Obamacare = Romneycare = Mitt's the Biggest Loser?

Monday, 22nd March 2010

Jon Chait loves a good fight so I'm not surprised he's in I Told You So mood today. I kinda, sorta, less confidently, told you so too even after Massachusetts when the prospect for HCR were pretty bleak and Fred Barnes was saying it was dead, dead, dead.

Well, we all get things wrong and sometimes perhaps we get a little lucky. The chap with the most to lose from last night's vote - in terms of politics and 2012 if nothing else - is our old chum Mitt Romney. No wonder Romney released this statement:

America has just witnessed an unconscionable abuse of power. President Obama has betrayed his oath to the nation -- rather than bringing us together, ushering in a new kind of politics, and rising above raw partisanship, he has succumbed to the lowest denominator of incumbent power: justifying the means by extolling the ends. He promised better; we deserved better.

He calls his accomplishment “historic” -- in this he is correct, although not for the reason he intends. Rather, it is an historic usurpation of the legislative process -- he unleashed the nuclear option, enlisted not a single Republican vote in either chamber, bribed reluctant members of his own party, paid-off his union backers, scapegoated insurers, and justified his act with patently fraudulent accounting. What Barack Obama has ushered into the American political landscape is not good for our country; in the words of an ancient maxim, “what starts twisted, ends twisted.”

His health-care bill is unhealthy for America. It raises taxes, slashes the more private side of Medicare, installs price controls, and puts a new federal bureaucracy in charge of health care. It will create a new entitlement even as the ones we already have are bankrupt. For these reasons and more, the act should be repealed. That campaign begins today.

In other words, Romney is now pledged to running against his own record. This is an unusual strategy but one forced upon him by a) his actual record and b) the temper of the Republican party and conservative movement. All this trouble over one tiny bill he signed when Governor of Massachusetts! Because Obamacre is, in the view of plenty of sensible observers, merely a souped-up version of the Romneycare Mitt signed into law in Boston - and that he boasted about during the 2008 campaign. Back then it was a case of "I can fix health care because I've done it in the Bay State". How times change.

Now, of course, he must disavow this and pretend it never happened. In a sense, mind you, this merely shows that, for all that the MA reforms may not have been perfect and for all that they may not scale to the national level, the ideas behind Obamacare were hardly revolutionary. The detail may, for sure, be another matter. Still, in outline, Governor Romney could be proud of this sort of thing; Candidate Romney must disavow his own past.

So this, at least potentially, makes the race for the 2012 GOP nomination even more open and, hence, increases its entertainment potential. Romney isn't done yet but since his populism is transparently phoney it's a problem for him that he's now going to find it difficult to return to his can-do, technocratic roots.

The legislative process may have been, to put it mildly, untidy but the President and the Congressional leadership had a mandate to produce these reforms. Complaining that they've done what they said they would do and howling that it's not fair and a big Democrat took the ball and ran away is neither dignified nor persuasive.

Maybe the Mormonism would have made it difficult for Mitt anyway; the health care thing makes it all the harder for him to win the nomination. In that sense he's the biggest (political) loser today; in that sense too you may say that Obamacare is a price worth paying if it ends Romney's hopes of reaching the White House...

Filed under: 2012 (151 more articles) , GOP (305 more articles) , Health (218 more articles) , Obama (355 more articles) , Romney (60 more articles)

Previous Back to Alex Massie Next

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (13)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

CG

March 22nd, 2010 3:30pm Report this comment

Romney is pitiful and constantly, through his own words and actions, exposes himself as the fraud that he is. At the moment it is still impossible to envisage a credible Republican candidate for 2012 - all the ones on view at the moment are either incompetent or barking mad (or both in the case of Sarah Palin). Maybe the one person that could have a good go at it is Jeb Bush, but he might not be to popular with some in the GOP.

Conservative Cabbie

March 22nd, 2010 3:31pm Report this comment

Romneycare does indeed provide us with a guide to Obamacare:

Massachusetts has the highest insurance premiums in America.

Insurance premiums in Mass. rose by 40$ compared to the 33% national average.

Half of all the Doctors trained in Mass. leave the state citing overwork and poor pay whilst one in four are considering a change in career.

Over 30,000 LEGAL immigrants had their coverage dropped because of the runaway expense of Romneycare.

Whilst waiting times fell in other areas, those in Massachusetts increased.

Thankyou Alex for reminding us of what was achieved last night. Some legacy.

Steve F

March 22nd, 2010 3:53pm Report this comment

Depends on how you parse the Democrat's "mandate," I reckon.

Marbury

March 22nd, 2010 3:56pm Report this comment

I suspect that's why Romney has led with an attack on process rather than substance of legislation - "unconscionable abuse of power" and all that.

He's a deeply silly man.

fifer

March 22nd, 2010 4:39pm Report this comment

"an unconscionable abuse of power"?

Senate: democratic elections put the Dems in charge
House: democratic elections put the Dems in charge
White House: a democratic election put Obama in charge

There's nothing in the Constitution about supermajorities so Mitt might like to go back to his first grade civics lessons. As indeed might any Republicans standing in the mid-terms on a platform of "I'm going to take your healthcare away", I suspect.

If it's unconscionable abuses of power he's looking for, using 9/11 as an excuse for invading Iraq is a much better example, particularly since it remains the best example of the sort of incompetence that got his crew kicked out of the executive & legislature.

Alex Massie

March 22nd, 2010 5:11pm Report this comment

CC - Well, maybe. As I say I don't doubt that Obamacare will, like Romneycare, be more expensive than promised. But remember that there's no appetite for repealing Romneycare amongst MA Republicans either. Scott Brown objected to Obamacare because MA had already done it and he didn't see why MA taxpayers should help out other states. He *supports* Romneycare.

Perhaps this will, in the short to medium term, be a vote-loser for Democrats but I wouldn't want to put too much money on that proposition, far less on its long-term unpopularity.

And, again, if Scott Brown supports Obamacare's little brother then it may not be quite the "new era of socialism" some are suggesting.

That's all.

Right On

March 22nd, 2010 5:26pm Report this comment

Romney will be helped by time - the healthcare fight will more than likely be a distant memory by the time 2012 rolls around. Just can't see him being the nominee - a shame that a pretty capable executive has become such a spineless politician.

The GOP really needs someone new to appear -they have some interesting up and coming contenders - Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Bob McDonnell, John Kasich (if he can knock off Ted Strickland in Ohio), Marco Rubio but they are all years from a Presidential run.

I'd guess if Rick Perry survives the gubernatorial election in Texas this November that he'll be the nominee.

ndm

March 22nd, 2010 5:56pm Report this comment

The Republican Party needs to dump its base. Look what it did to Romney who was pretty well regarded as a technocratic Governor of Massachusetts (Yglesias confesses to voting for him). And look what it is doing to Meg Whitman who, although perhaps benefitting from some right-time right-place stuff at EBay, presumably has some confidence yet appears to be pandering to the worst instincts of the Republican base in the Republican Primary for Governor of California. What makes intellectual honesty and moral integrity so alien to the Republican Party of today?

ndm

March 22nd, 2010 5:59pm Report this comment

Being the only Republican Jew in Congress will almost certainly prevent Eric Cantor from making it through a Republican Primary for national office.

Conservative Cabbie

March 22nd, 2010 6:18pm Report this comment

ndm

A bit like Jesse Jackson in Democratic primaries?

As I'm sure you'll point out, things change.

"What makes intellectual honesty and moral integrity so alien to the Republican Party of today?"

Ummm. You did note the lack of intellectual integrity amongst Democratic legislators that led to that CBO report. The lack of a Doc Fix, the double counting of medicare savings and the fact that the first ten years of Obamacare spending actually runs 2014-2024 rather than 2010-2020 as the Democrats like to claim. Intellectual honesty? Do me a favour!

Conservative Cabbie

March 22nd, 2010 6:19pm Report this comment

Right On

How about Mitch Daniels?

Right On

March 22nd, 2010 6:41pm Report this comment

@Conservative Cabbie.

Big fan of Daniels, but I wonder if he's got what it takes nationally - there is a chance that as an anti-Obama type candidate he may come through but I'd guess he's got too much catching up to do.

I'd guess Romney has too many negatives though he has stacks of cash and is much better known than he was in 2008, Huckabee doesn't have sufficent support and I just can't see Sarah Palin sustaining a lengthy electoral run. Pawlenty is simply too boring.

The rest will sit it out so I think Perry may well be the one to watch.

Conservative Cabbie

March 22nd, 2010 8:43pm Report this comment

Right On

I think Republicans, unhappy with the alternatives will embrace a compromise candidate like Daniels. He has the record to appeal to conservatives and the intellect and 'reasonableness' to appeal to country club Republicans. And ax for the general, following her convention speech, Palin got a 63% approval amongst unaffiliated voters. We all know what happened from there, but Daniels has the intellect and personality to keep those numbers high. Many voters will be looking for an antidote to the no-substance "yes we can" Obama style campaigning. Daniels embodies that antidote.

Post comment