Mitt Romney Fans: Can you justify this?

[ScreamingEagle]

Mitt Romney brough my state's (MA) health plan into being right before he left office.

This plan requires all MA citizens to have health insurance or pay a tax penalty, also known as a fine, every year for not having coverage.

The plan also provides health care to low income people.

His plan has also gotten my state over 2billion dollars in debt (you could argue that is devaul patrick's fault since he took over right after romney instituted the plan).


Just curious as I know many conservatives like romney and are against universal health coverage.

SO how do you reconcile these differences?

Romney supporters you really need to nail this one down if you want him to run in 2012 without getting slammed by his opponents on the right.

Quite honestly, this is probably the one major difference Ive had with him. I didnt see that as a reason to ignore all the other things He has done.

First, I dont have a problem if states experiment with legislation. They have much more authority than the Federal government and in theory are more accountable to the people.

Second, he tried to involve some free market solutions into the problem. Im not sure he succeeded with it. In fact, I am willing to bet any effects those principles had were counteracted by the legislature there. But he is at least trying.

Third, I know he is an intelligent man who probably sees clearly what was good and bad about the program. The more time it has to be analyzed. the more informed he will be in the future.

I think Romney will be a good contender....I also was not that happy about his health plan in Mass. but at least he did not establish a whole big new government program like Obama is trying to do (and which he is against)....instead he attempted to help the private sector by mandating insurance and using tax payer money to get more private insurance coverage to more people....

IMO Republicans need to get busy seeking out Hispanic candidates.....Hispanics account for about 15% of the population now....more votes than the 13% blacks...and many Hispanics have conservative values....however there aren't many Republican Hispanics in office....perhaps someone like Devin Nunes of California is a potential....? (i know nothing about him)..........or maybe George P......?

 

[auditor0007]

Mitt Romney brough my state's (MA) health plan into being right before he left office.

This plan requires all MA citizens to have health insurance or pay a tax penalty, also known as a fine, every year for not having coverage.

The plan also provides health care to low income people.

His plan has also gotten my state over 2billion dollars in debt (you could argue that is devaul patrick's fault since he took over right after romney instituted the plan).


Just curious as I know many conservatives like romney and are against universal health coverage.

SO how do you reconcile these differences?

Romney supporters you really need to nail this one down if you want him to run in 2012 without getting slammed by his opponents on the right.

Quite honestly, this is probably the one major difference Ive had with him. I didnt see that as a reason to ignore all the other things He has done.

First, I dont have a problem if states experiment with legislation. They have much more authority than the Federal government and in theory are more accountable to the people.

Second, he tried to involve some free market solutions into the problem. Im not sure he succeeded with it. In fact, I am willing to bet any effects those principles had were counteracted by the legislature there. But he is at least trying.

Third, I know he is an intelligent man who probably sees clearly what was good and bad about the program. The more time it has to be analyzed. the more informed he will be in the future.

Romney understands something all too many fail to see, and that is that the cost of health insurance is crippling employers. The only way to begin to control those costs is through some mechansism that covers everyone, or at least nearly everyone.

The main problem with the way things are now is the fact that both the insurance providers and medical community knows they have a cash cow and they both continue to milk it everywhere and anywhere they can. Romney's plan has been effective in many ways but not in cutting costs, at least not yet. That may change down the road however.

The key to making a plan such as Romney's successful is to get employers out of the business of providing health coverage to their workers. There are two very strong arguments for this. First of all, taking the responsibility and expense away from employers would make them more competetive both globally and here at home. Granted, if they were no longer permitted to provide health benefits, they would be expected to raise wages to compensate their employees.

Secondly and most importantly, if we want to keep heathcare in the private sector, the best way to reduce costs is to allow what the market will bare. Having employers pay for their employees health insurance creates a feeling that healthcare is free to the employee and it does not make the providers of insurance anywhere near as competetive as they would have to be if individuals were responsible for purchasing their own insurance.

Very simply, use Romney's plan by requiring everyone to purchase insurance. Make it so insurance companies must accept everyone regardless of conditions at the same rate. In the beginning, this seems unfair to those who are healthier because they will pay more. However, over time it won't matter as everyone will pay for health insurance from the time they are young until they retire, assuming that they are working. Eventually those costs will become fair to everyone.

Obviously, the state would need to subsidize those who cannot afford insurance on their own. This is being done in Mass already. The key to driving down costs is the fact that individuals having to actually purchase their own coverage will not pay as much as employers pay. Many will choose catostrophic plans with Health Saving Account plans. Insurance companies would have to find a way to reduce administrative costs in order to remain competetive. Doctors and hospitals would need more transparency in what they charged, so there wouldn't be so much bickering over how much an insurance company would pay for each procedure. This is what drives costs up so much as far as administrative costs go.

I guarantee that if insurance companies had to attract their customers individually rather than through expensive employer plans, you would see costs drop drastically. The same would be true for the medical community as they would realize those purchasing their services would not continue feeding the cow forever.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

That was a good post