It has been fascinating to watch Mitt Romney during these first days of the health reform era (or, as the Republicans call it, "Armageddon"). We've long known, of course, that Romney has a penchant for retooling his convictions to fit the exigencies of the moment, but what this presidential aspirant is doing this week - shedding his old image as a responsible, pragmatic executive; brandishing a pitchfork so that he can pander to the most irrational elements of the conservative base - is downright breath-taking.
There's no mystery why he's doing this. He wants to win the '12 GOP nomination (although he has yet to formally declare his candidacy), and he figures that the best way to win the key early contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina is to convince right-leaning primary voters that he too sees Barack Obama as a socialist/fascist/Kenyan/whatever and a betrayer of America besides. Which is why, on Monday, Romney claimed that the president has "betrayed his oath to the nation" by signing "unconstitutional" health care reform; and why, yesterday, he circulated an email asking his political supporters to donate money to the cause of repealing health care reform.
And yet, despite his latest fervently rightward tilt, I suspect that Romney may well wind up as roadkill after his rival contestants out him as a phony. It's a 30-second attack ad waiting to happen, and it has the advantage of being essentially true:
The Obama health reform law that Romney purportedly loathes actually resembles, in many key respects, the Massachusetts health reform law that Romney championed and signed as governor - starting with the individual mandate, the requirement that all citizens purchase health insurance. The same requirement that Romney now finds so objectionable.
Rather than having me list the provisions that the two laws have in common, let's turn the job over to Fox News. Seventeen days ago, host Chris Wallace sliced Romney to ribbons on this very issue. Here's Wallace: "Let's look at the plan that you signed into law in Massachusetts in 2006. You have an individual mandate. You have an employer mandate. You have subsidies for some of the uninsured. You set minimum insurance coverage standards. Again, a lot of emails I got from conservatives make this point. They say it sure sounds an awful lot like Obamacare....We got a lot of email from conservatives this week who said that you are the wrong man" to be making the case against Obama.
This is not good. A Republican presidential aspirant who runs afoul of Fox News might as well give it up and go sell shoes. At one point, Romney insisted that his reform law had "no government insurance, no government option, if you will." Wallace retorted, "Well, there's no government option in the Obama plan anymore, either." To which Romney sputtered, "No, that's right, that's right, and so what we did was entirely different..." It was ugly, watching this guy trying to shed his own record.
The record shows that, when Romney was governor and closest to his true self as a business-oriented executive, he worked overtime to cover the uninsured and require everyone to purchase coverage - with government subsidies, if necessary. He became the first (and he's still the only) governor to sign a health insurance mandate.
On April 8, 2006, shortly before signing the Massachusetts law, he talked up health reform on NPR, sounding much like Obama today: "We're spending a billion dollars giving health care to people who don't have insurance. And my question was, could we take that billion dollars and help the poor purchase insurance? Let them pay what they can afford. We'll subsidize what they can't."
He told NPR that the reforms would work only if everyone bought coverage. He said that those citizens who can afford insurance would be required to buy it - "otherwise, you're just passing your expenses on to someone else." Obama couldn't have said it better.
But my favorite part was when Romney attacked those who would defy the law and refuse to buy coverage: "That's not Republican, that's not Democratic, that's not libertarian. That's just wrong."
Today, it's clear that Romney 2.0 (or perhaps it's 3.0) would prefer that conservative Republican voters ignore the earlier Romney or, better yet, remain blissfully unaware. The latter scenario is not very likely. The conservative Club for Growth, the interest group that seeks to expunge all moderate impulses from the GOP, is already assailing Romney; as Club official Andy Roth reportedly remarked two weeks ago, "The individual mandate is diametrically against what free-market conservatives believe in," and if Romney thinks he won't be held accountable for his mandate, "then I think he is in the wrong party."
And wait to see what happens during the long presidential primary season (which, believe it or not, begins in a mere eight months, right after the midterms). Rival Republican candidates will likely bring up the Massachusetts law in the debates, and they will likely distill its essence in the TV ads. Just like in the Fox News gig, Romney will have to spend precious time on defense, explaining how his law differs from Obama's law. He who toils on defense is least likely to survive.
In theory, Romney could take the opposite tack - by pointing out that the health coverage mandate concept was actually hatched by the conservative Heritage Foundation back in the early '90s, as a way to get people to take responsibility for themselves - but, of course, it would be political suicide for him to suggest that conservatives are now behaving as hypocrites, attacking their own mandate concept only because Obama has embraced it. And besides, there's no way Romney can flip flop yet again, now that he has morphed into a placard-wielding populist who's apparently intent on assailing the mandate embraced by his former self. His new, overcompensating self may be his only hope for capturing conservative hearts, tenuous as those prospects might be.
So he'll have to twist in the wind indefinitely, even as the White House keeps twisting the knife. On Monday, press secretary Robert Gibbs mentioned the similarities between Obama's law and Romney's law, before adding: "I'm sure Gov. Romney hates every time I say that." You can bet on it.
Romney is probably the most electable Republican available, if the party were willing to run a moderate and Romney were willing to stop pretending he is anything other than a moderate Republican. So it's heart-warming and hilarious to watch the attack dogs of the right chew him up and spit out their only remote, faint hope of competing against Obama in 2012. Bring on Huckleberry/Palin! Or better yet, Palin/Beck! Yersinia Pestis- Massachusetts is a good example of the problems associated with futher government intervention in healthcare. A well intended program ends up making the problems worse , not better. Romney would do better in pointing out the mistake of the Massachusetts program instead of trying to defend it. He could move forward in his campaign by talking about other issues like government largesse, fiscal responsibility, taxes, the economy etc.... If Polman's thinking is that Obama is going to get re-elected because one Republican candidate is no different, then I think that is flawed logic. It is the " all the other kids are doing it excuse " that is becoming tire and worn out. The election is a long way away and there will be other people running for the nomination
- Yersinia- That is a tried and true way for Conservatives to lose the election. Taking political advice from someone who despise the very air that conservatives breath is not a good idea. And if I were you I would be carefull pontificating upon your party's eternal hold on power.
Given the hypocricy that occurs in D.C. and around the country, by both parties, on an hourly basis - your post is mind-numbingly devisive, Dick. Question: Have you EVER run a business, hired/fired employees, made payroll or groveled for a loan? Or, as I suspect, are you an over-educated, academic twit without a hint of real world experience? A Friend- A Friend- Well said. One of the best posts in a while.
I wonder if Polman will exhibit the same glee as Obama trys to paint himself as a centrist again in 2012. I think not. Conan the Barbarian
Comment removed.
Interesting how Dickey and crew avoid any mention of finances, CBO assumptions and the like...INTERESTING!!! They just attack Republicans, "Hey it worked on Bush, McCain and Palin". Uh Dickey...you are running out of rope!!! LOL!!!! sarah89
The Democratic Party Propaganda Industry (i.e. the newspaper industry in America) is at it again. You cannot believe anything you read in the papers, except that they are just talking points from shower-man Rahm. CD75
The Democratic Party Propaganda Industry (i.e. the newspaper industry in America) is at it again. You cannot believe anything you read in the papers, except that they are just talking points from shower-man Rahm. CD75
CD75, you're generalizing and that can be dangerous. You're focusing on the Democratic party and their propaganda industy, but what about the Republicans and theirs? Both sides have their "industry" and one should not trust any of them. That's why everyone needs to do their own research and come to their own conclusions instead of simply repeating talking points that do not have a shred of truth (which I see constantly). middie
I'm not sure if health care reform will live up to its billing, but its passage has already paid dividends given the extent it has caused you wing nuts to become even more unhinged. Polman's post was fairly simple and logical. The present republican front runner, and most moderate republican national figure (who won the straw poll at the recent CPAC conference) will never make it through the primary process. Putting aside the fact that he is a Morman (always a hit with evangelicals), a former financial executive (a hit with tea party types) and former governor of Massachusetts (sure to rally Southerners), he supported Obamacare before it was Obamacare. Even if the republicans make gains in the mid terms, their presidential nominee (Jindal, Palin, Huckabee) will be road kill in 2012 just like Bob Dole in 1996. wru
Correction - Ron Paul won the most recent CPAC straw poll, Romney (who won in 2009)came in second, Palin third. In any event, not exactly a murderer's row of potential candidates. Tim Pawlenty you say? - He tied "undecided" with six percent of the vote. wru
Hilary was for the mandate in the primary Obama strongly denounced her for supporting a mandate. Dick where is the article about that???? kmjm22
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
- December 2011
- August 2010
- August
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008














