Rangerland Forum Information

[Hockey101]

No popular names in the debate in South Carolina, except for Ross Perot wannabe Ron Paul.

My reaction to that group (Pawlenty looked dead, Santorum uptight)....

[Hockey101]

If i were Romney i'd just say that yeah, i went with it... it was worth a shot at a state level, but not to even dream of it on a federal level. Also, i think that Romney's healthcare did not result in affecting Medicare, did not inflict on insurance prices controls, and it did not raise taxes on businesses. At the state level, for small government, it was a decent plan that was well approved. I mean, his bill was no more than 100 pages long and how long was Obama's? Two thousand something........but yeah, it didn't matter what was in it because we were told to see it after it was signed.

The MA health plan subsidized the purchasing of private health insurance by lower income people using funds that the state already used for paying the free-care (like Charity Care) at hospitals. What he pretty much did was shifting funds that were issued to hospitals as reimbursements for the free-care and to the people so that they could purchase an insurance plan by themselves. Obamacare actually finances its subsidyby increasing taxes and eventual defunding in the Medicare program.

Actually i remember reading that the MA legislature declined his proposal of not fining employers that did not acquire a healthcare coverage. I think Romney worked this plan out with liberals and found a middle ground.

I mean, the current management of the MA healthcare plan under the current serving governor also makes a difference in the current results. Romney was allowed to pursue such a plan in the first place because he managed to balance the budget and actually have a surplus. We haven't been close at all at the federal level.

I think Mitt can do better in explaining his "Romneycare". Obviously there are a lot of similarities, but the situations are very different. It was an state issue that as governor, leader, of the state had to address. And, he did because he could have and had a majority backing it up. It wasn't an ideological agenda, such as that of Obama and Biden, and Pelosi, and Reid. It was a process that even newly elected Scott Brown, senator from MA, approved of. Obamacare was not a process. It did not hold a majority backing it up. This country has been on the brink of bankruptcy the past few years. If this country had anything close to a balanced budget, then Obamacare would not be such a scandalous issue. But it was constantly pushed, constantly fought over..... it was doubted by elected democratic officials, and a couple of them were pretty much bribed into supporting it. It had to be watered down because it lacked the support.

The situations of the MA plan and Obamacare are greatly different.