"I will repeal Obamacare" Mitt Romney

[Valerie]

In your first video, the Healthy American's Act (Wyden-Bennet), does not have federal mandates in it Healthy Americans Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. It changes who buys insurance for individuals from employers to individuals buying it.

I'm not sure what you're quibbling with--is it the definition of mandate? Wyden-Bennett established that "Each adult individual shall have the responsibility to enroll in a [Health Americans Private Insurance] plan" and specified penalties for failing to do so. Structurally that requirement is different from a similar requirement in the ACA because they're assessed very differently.

But are you telling me that this difference is enough not only to win Mitt Romney's support and put this ugly judicial business behind us, but also to erase the perception that there's any mandate on the individual at all? If that's all it'll take to end the controversy, I'd be all for swapping Wyden-Bennett's language with the ACA's on this point right now. Perhaps Wyden can introduce the bill making the revision.



I'd be interested in seeing/reading that missing explanation from that venue (not some other one where's he's cleared the etch a sketch). He clearly said "no, no, I like mandates" in response to Charlie Gibson (?) saying "...although you've backed away from mandates on a national basis."

He believes in personal responsibility and accountability and sees no problem with a State quantifying the cost of Health Care in their own community. He believes the People's best interest is best represented in that manner...

...whatever the justices decide in what is certain to be a landmark decision, the case against ObamaCare extends far beyond questions about its constitutionality. President Obama's program is an unfolding disaster for the American economy, a budget-busting entitlement, and a dramatic new federal intrusion into our lives.


It is precisely for those reasons that I've opposed a one-size-fits-all health care plan for the entire nation. What we need is a free market, federalist approach to making quality, affordable health insurance available to every American.



...


A key question is how to provide care for the poor, the uninsured and the chronically ill. My program begins by taking seriously the words of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." In line with the intentions of our Founding Fathers, I favor giving each of the 50 states the resources and the responsibility to craft the health care solutions that suit their citizens best.


Why I'd repeal ObamaCare

Health Care

God forbid the Federal Government set MANDATES on the insurance industry instead of the people!!

To the extent that we have any federal regulation, it should focus on helping markets work. Thus, to take one much discussed problem, individuals with pre-existing conditions who have maintained continuous health insurance coverage should be guaranteed the ability to retain coverage. Also, individuals are currently prohibited from purchasing health insurance across states lines, which reduces competition and makes many plans subject to expensive state benefit requirements. The federal government can open up these restricted markets. States could still regulate their insurance industries, but consumers across the U.S. would benefit from lower costs and greater choice.

 

[Valerie]

The reforms I propose for the country could not be more different from Barack Obama's. They entail no new taxes, no massive diversions of funds away from Medicare, no tax discrimination, and no new bureaucracies. At the same time, they increase consumer choice, lower health care costs, decrease government spending, and give states responsibility for dealing with the uninsured. Whatever the Supreme Court decides about the constitutionality of ObamaCare, we already know that it is bad policy and wrong for America. Abolishing it and putting sensible changes in its place will be one of my highest priorities as president.

Why I'd repeal ObamaCare

Unfortunately, the transformation in American health care set in motion by Obamacare will take us in precisely the wrong direction. The bill, itself more than 2,400 pages long, relies on a dense web of regulations, fees, subsidies, excise taxes, exchanges, and rule-setting boards to give the federal government extraordinary control over every corner of the health care system. The costs are commensurate: Obamacare added a trillion dollars in new health care spending. To pay for it, the law raised taxes by $500 billion on everyone from middle-class families to innovative medical device makers, and then slashed $500 billion from Medicare.

Health Care

 

[Intense]

Then what?

See: Snapshots: Health Care Spending in the United States & Selected OECD Countries - Kaiser Family Foundation

The Democrats pushed health care reform for a reason, the cost to individuals, business and government was putting a drag on the economy and individuals stood to lose everything they worked years for when a catastrophic illness or injury occurred.

I'm glad He's committed.

Mitt’s Plan

On his first day in office, Mitt Romney will issue an executive order that paves the way for the federal government to issue Obamacare waivers to all fifty states. He will then work with Congress to repeal the full legislation as quickly as possible.

In place of Obamacare, Mitt will pursue policies that give each state the power to craft a health care reform plan that is best for its own citizens. The federal government’s role will be to help markets work by creating a level playing field for competition.

Restore State Leadership and Flexibility

Mitt will begin by returning states to their proper place in charge of regulating local insurance markets and caring for the poor, uninsured, and chronically ill. States will have both the incentive and the flexibility to experiment, learn from one another, and craft the approaches best suited to their own citizens.

Block grant Medicaid and other payments to states
Limit federal standards and requirements on both private insurance and Medicaid coverage
Ensure flexibility to help the uninsured, including public-private partnerships, exchanges, and subsidies
Ensure flexibility to help the chronically ill, including high-risk pools, reinsurance, and risk adjustment
Offer innovation grants to explore non-litigation alternatives to dispute resolution

Promote Free Markets and Fair Competition

Competition drives improvements in efficiency and effectiveness, offering consumers higher quality goods and services at lower cost. It can have the same effect in the health care system, if given the chance to work.

Cap non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits
Empower individuals and small businesses to form purchasing pools
Prevent discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage
Facilitate IT interoperability

Empower Consumer Choice

For markets to work, consumers must have the information and the power to make decisions about their own care. Placing the patient at the center of the process will drive quality up and cost down while ensuring that services are designed to provide what Americans actually want.

End tax discrimination against the individual purchase of insurance
Allow consumers to purchase insurance across state lines
Unshackle HSAs by allowing funds to be used for insurance premiums
Promote "co-insurance" products
Promote alternatives to "fee for service"
Encourage "Consumer Reports"-type ratings of alternative insurance plans

Health Care

 

[sealybobo]

Mitt can not be the President of the United States. Does anyone think it is ok for American millionaires to hide their money in Switzerland? Do you think our government should stop allowing millionaires from hiding their money in Swiss banks? Well then you can not vote for Romney because he has money in Swiss banks.

No presidential aspirant has ever had such an exotic financial portfolio.

Does Warren Buffet have a bank account in Switzerland? He said, 'No, there are plenty of good banks in the United States,'"

Why would someone have money in a Swiss Bank account? Is he hiding something or does he believe the Swiss Franc is a stronger currency than the United States dollar?

When is the last time a presidential candidate for the United States had a Swiss bank account? I think the answer is never.

The Romney campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

 

[dblack]

People will swallow just about anything.

 

[Intense]

Mitt can not be the President of the United States. Does anyone think it is ok for American millionaires to hide their money in Switzerland? Do you think our government should stop allowing millionaires from hiding their money in Swiss banks? Well then you can not vote for Romney because he has money in Swiss banks.

No presidential aspirant has ever had such an exotic financial portfolio.

Does Warren Buffet have a bank account in Switzerland? He said, 'No, there are plenty of good banks in the United States,'"

Why would someone have money in a Swiss Bank account? Is he hiding something or does he believe the Swiss Franc is a stronger currency than the United States dollar?

When is the last time a presidential candidate for the United States had a Swiss bank account? I think the answer is never.

The Romney campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

Horse Shit. When it becomes Illegal for Americans to deposit money in Swiss Banks, you might have a leg to stand on. It's private property, his, not yours or mine, get it? Do you want to buy a vowel?

 

[Valerie]

Mitt can not be the President of the United States. Does anyone think it is ok for American millionaires to hide their money in Switzerland? Do you think our government should stop allowing millionaires from hiding their money in Swiss banks? Well then you can not vote for Romney because he has money in Swiss banks.

No presidential aspirant has ever had such an exotic financial portfolio.

Does Warren Buffet have a bank account in Switzerland? He said, 'No, there are plenty of good banks in the United States,'"

Why would someone have money in a Swiss Bank account? Is he hiding something or does he believe the Swiss Franc is a stronger currency than the United States dollar?

When is the last time a presidential candidate for the United States had a Swiss bank account? I think the answer is never.

The Romney campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

Horse Shit. When it becomes Illegal for Americans to deposit money in Swiss Banks, you might have a leg to stand on. It's private property, his, not yours or mine, get it? Do you want to buy a vowel?

Sillybooboo just bought himself an O !

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

In your first video, the Healthy American's Act (Wyden-Bennet), does not have federal mandates in it Healthy Americans Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. It changes who buys insurance for individuals from employers to individuals buying it.

I'm not sure what you're quibbling with--is it the definition of mandate? Wyden-Bennett established that "Each adult individual shall have the responsibility to enroll in a [Health Americans Private Insurance] plan" and specified penalties for failing to do so. Structurally that requirement is different from a similar requirement in the ACA because they're assessed very differently.

But are you telling me that this difference is enough not only to win Mitt Romney's support and put this ugly judicial business behind us, but also to erase the perception that there's any mandate on the individual at all? If that's all it'll take to end the controversy, I'd be all for swapping Wyden-Bennett's language with the ACA's on this point right now. Perhaps Wyden can introduce the bill making the revision.

On your second video if you listen to Romeny's explaination, which is cut out of that video you presented, you would see he does not want the federal mandate for purchases of products like health insurance.

I'd be interested in seeing/reading that missing explanation from that venue (not some other one where's he's cleared the etch a sketch). He clearly said "no, no, I like mandates" in response to Charlie Gibson (?) saying "...although you've backed away from mandates on a national basis."

You truly don't see the difference between giving the federal government the authority, which they currently DO NOT HAVE under the constitution, to mandate purchases of private products and a state making similar, not the same, types of decisions on a state level within the confines of their own states constitution...do you?


IF there was a video that DID NOT cut romney off right before his explaination I can't find it right now. However, if the people who made those videos were honest they would have included the rest of the context....but that context hurts the argument of "Romney for federal mandates" that people are dishonestly putting out there.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Then what?

See: Snapshots: Health Care Spending in the United States & Selected OECD Countries - Kaiser Family Foundation

The Democrats pushed health care reform for a reason, the cost to individuals, business and government was putting a drag on the economy and individuals stood to lose everything they worked years for when a catastrophic illness or injury occurred.

I'm glad He's committed.

Mitt’s Plan

On his first day in office, Mitt Romney will issue an executive order that paves the way for the federal government to issue Obamacare waivers to all fifty states. He will then work with Congress to repeal the full legislation as quickly as possible.

In place of Obamacare, Mitt will pursue policies that give each state the power to craft a health care reform plan that is best for its own citizens. The federal government’s role will be to help markets work by creating a level playing field for competition.

Restore State Leadership and Flexibility

Mitt will begin by returning states to their proper place in charge of regulating local insurance markets and caring for the poor, uninsured, and chronically ill. States will have both the incentive and the flexibility to experiment, learn from one another, and craft the approaches best suited to their own citizens.

Block grant Medicaid and other payments to states
Limit federal standards and requirements on both private insurance and Medicaid coverage
Ensure flexibility to help the uninsured, including public-private partnerships, exchanges, and subsidies
Ensure flexibility to help the chronically ill, including high-risk pools, reinsurance, and risk adjustment
Offer innovation grants to explore non-litigation alternatives to dispute resolution

Promote Free Markets and Fair Competition

Competition drives improvements in efficiency and effectiveness, offering consumers higher quality goods and services at lower cost. It can have the same effect in the health care system, if given the chance to work.

Cap non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits
Empower individuals and small businesses to form purchasing pools
Prevent discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage
Facilitate IT interoperability

Empower Consumer Choice

For markets to work, consumers must have the information and the power to make decisions about their own care. Placing the patient at the center of the process will drive quality up and cost down while ensuring that services are designed to provide what Americans actually want.

End tax discrimination against the individual purchase of insurance
Allow consumers to purchase insurance across state lines
Unshackle HSAs by allowing funds to be used for insurance premiums
Promote "co-insurance" products
Promote alternatives to "fee for service"
Encourage "Consumer Reports"-type ratings of alternative insurance plans

Health Care

you will hurt the dishonest anti-romney talking points with truth

 

[Greenbeard]

You truly don't see the difference between giving the federal government the authority, which they currently DO NOT HAVE under the constitution, to mandate purchases of private products and a state making similar, not the same, types of decisions on a state level within the confines of their own states constitution...do you?

Wyden-Bennett wasn't a piece of state-level legislation, it was introduced in the U.S. Senate. I thought this was clear several posts ago, but I'm not referring to Massachusetts' reforms, at the moment I'm talking about Romney's expressed admiration and support for Wyden-Bennett.

So what I'm wondering is, if Wyden-Benett's mechanism for deterring adverse selection were substituted for the ACA's (i.e. the individual mandate), would that make everything all right? At least in Romney's eyes?

 

[starcraftzzz]

You truly don't see the difference between giving the federal government the authority, which they currently DO NOT HAVE under the constitution, to mandate purchases of private products and a state making similar, not the same, types of decisions on a state level within the confines of their own states constitution...do you?


IF there was a video that DID NOT cut romney off right before his explaination I can't find it right now. However, if the people who made those videos were honest they would have included the rest of the context....but that context hurts the argument of "Romney for federal mandates" that people are dishonestly putting out there.

How many times do you have to be told this? The mandate doesn't for you to buy insurance it just makes it so people who do buy insurance pay lower taxes then those who don't.
Youre dense and stupid no denying it

 

[starcraftzzz]

. The federal government’s role will be to help markets work by creating a level playing field for competition.

Odd because Obama care already does this. S Romenys going to repeal Obamacare and then re-pass Obamacare and call it his own. ROTFL

Mitt will begin by returning states to their proper place in charge of regulating local insurance markets

States can already do this. So basically Romney is going to try and claim he invented the wheel.

Block grant Medicaid and other payments to states

Awesome so instead of 50million unisured it will soon be 60million. What a great plan.

Limit federal standards and requirements on both private insurance and Medicaid coverage

IE make it so you have shittier health care quality

Ensure flexibility to help the uninsured, including public-private partnerships, exchanges, and subsidies Ensure flexibility to help the chronically ill, including high-risk pools, reinsurance, and risk adjustment

ObamaCare already does this.

Offer innovation grants to explore non-litigation alternatives to dispute resolution

Obamacare already does this.

Cap non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits

Of which states have already done of which it didn't lower costs, and instead just screwed people who got screwed by incompetent fraudulent doctors.

Empower individuals and small businesses to form purchasing pools
Prevent discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage

Obamacare already does that.

Facilitate IT interoperability

Obama already did that.

For markets to work, consumers must have the information and the power to make decisions about their own care. Placing the patient at the center of the process will drive quality up and cost down while ensuring that services are designed to provide what Americans actually want.

Obamacare already makes it so insurance companies have to provide their customers with clear easy to follow benefit plans.

Allow consumers to purchase insurance across state lines

ROTFL first you say Romney is going to make it so states can make their own regulations that they see fit now you say that according to Romney hes not going to let that happen.

Promote alternatives to "fee for service"

Again Obamacare already does that

Encourage "Consumer Reports"-type ratings of alternative insurance plans

Again Obamacare already does that

So basically Romneys plan is to repeal ObaamCare and then re-pass ObamaCare and call it his own. They only difference is that Romneys plan does very little compared to Obamacare to lower wasteful spending, results in double the amount of people with out access to health care, and still allows insurance companies to abuse and defraud consumers.

 

[Meister]

Starzz, it's a stepping stone towards UHS, you know it and so does everybody else.

 

[dblack]

You truly don't see the difference between giving the federal government the authority, which they currently DO NOT HAVE under the constitution, to mandate purchases of private products and a state making similar, not the same, types of decisions on a state level within the confines of their own states constitution...do you?

The only difference is in the extent of the damage. Both policies deny that individuals have a right to not buy insurance. Both policies assume that authoritarian government can dictate how we deal with our health care expenses. The fact that Romney was the first governor to push this through tells me all I need to know about his political ideology. I could never vote for someone with so little regard for freedom.