Mitt Romney Presidential Campaign

[_Abyssinia]

He said in a January 19th republican debate he thinks those with pre existing conditions should be covered which he said in the meet the press interview, he also said that those under 26 should be able to be covered on their parents insurance. Nothing new

 

[_Abyssinia]

Mitt Romney has chance in New Mexico according to new poll

examiner.com/article/mitt-romney-has-chance-new-mexico-according-to-new-poll

 

[JimR-OCDS]

news.yahoo.com/romney-says-keep-parts-obama-healthcare-law-155146420.html

and this;

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who has called for scrapping President Barack Obama’s 2010 U.S. healthcare law, said in remarks aired on Sunday that he likes key parts of “Obamacare” despite his party’s loathing of it and wants to retain them.

In other words, he’ll modify Obama Care, but not repeal it.

Thanks for the link

Jim

 

[_Abyssinia]

and this;

In other words, he’ll modify Obama Care, but not repeal it.

Thanks for the link

Jim

Ignore that he said replace

 

[meltzerboy]

news.yahoo.com/romney-says-keep-parts-obama-healthcare-law-155146420.html

This is so typical of Romney on many issues. It’s hard to trust him because he’ll say just about anything to get elected. But what will he actually do if he should become President? What position will he take then? At least with Obama, you more or less know where he stands, and if you don’t agree with, or abhor, his policies, you can vote for another candidate. But with Romney, you just don’t know for sure. I understand this was his first appearance outside of FOX news and he’s already wavering; but anyone who has closely followed him through the 2008 election cycle and the 2012 primaries of the current election is already aware that he remains an unknown entity. One thing we can be sure of: he must be a strong proponent of the theory of evolution since he is such a fine practitioner of the process. I have nothing against candidates’ changing their minds; change shows an open mind, a growth process. However, when this change manifests itself on almost a weekly or monthly basis, something else is happening, which reflects either an indecisive personality or a manipulative one, neither of which is a desirable feature of a potential President.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

See, we agree on something, but good luck changing that with all the lawyers in Congress.

No, the Democrats would point out that all they do is talk on the federal level.

Horse-hockey

BTW, we have had a grand experiment with Libertarianism in this country…I think we all know how that worked out. If you don’t believe me, you can read Jefferson Davis’ rather lengthy treatise on the subject.

John

We have never had an “experiment” with libertarianism. There are too many power hungry politicians and too many weak-minded people willing to vote for them.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Ignore that he said replace

If he’s going to keep parts of it, he’s not replacing it but modifying it.

Jim

 

[CatholcCrusader]

This is nothing new.

In 2009 the Republicans in Congress were begging for an issue by issue approach instead of one giant bill.

Existing conditions? Okay, pass a one page law saying that insurance companies can’t deny for pre-existing conditions.

Changing jobs? Okay, pass a one page law saying that insurance companies have to keep you on if you change jobs.

This is what Romney is saying. Keep the few bits and pieces that are good (and that is very few indeed) and trash the rest of it.

How did this post end up in this thread?
Man, you can’t even start a thread or know where your post will end up in this forum.

I was responding to thos former OP:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who has called for scrapping President Barack Obama’s 2010 U.S. healthcare law, said in remarks aired on Sunday that he likes key parts of “Obamacare” despite his party’s loathing of it and wants to retain them.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Romney also said;

‘‘Of course, there are a number of things that I like in healthcare reform that I’m
going to put in place,’’ Romney added. ‘‘One is to make sure that those with pre-
existing conditions can get coverage. Two is to assure that the marketplace allows for
individuals to have policies that cover their family up to whatever age they might
like.’’ news.yahoo.com/romney-says-keep-parts-obama-healthcare-law-155146420.html

Jim

 

[meltzerboy]

How did this post end up in this thread?
Man, you can’t even start a thread or know where your post will end up in this forum.

I was responding to thos former OP:

I think the threads are being consolidated for logistic purposes under the general categories of the Romney Presidential Campaign and the Obama Presidential Campaign.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Romney also said;

Jim

Romney said in the January 19th republican debate

But we’ll replace it, and I’ve laid out what I’ll replace it with. First, it’s a bill that does care for people that have preexisting conditions. If they’ve got a preexisting condition and they’ve been previously insured, they won’t be denied insurance going forward

Secondly, I’d allow people to own their own insurance, rather than just be able to get it from their employer. I want people to be able to take their insurance with them if they go from job to job

washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/2012-presidential-debates/republican-primary-debate-january-19-2012/

Romney has not said anything that that he has not said before

Romney admitted high costs in MA after the health care law was put in place

And it certainly doesn’t work perfectly. Massachusetts, by the way, had the highest insurance costs before the plan was put in place and after, but fortunately, the rate of growth has slowed down a little less than the overall nation. And one of the things I was proud of is that individuals who wanted to buy their own insurance saw their rates – when they were not part of a big group – saw their rates drop by some 40 percent with our plan.

Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said in June

Fixing our health care system means making sure that every American, regardless of their health care needs, can find quality, affordable coverage. That is why Governor Romney supports reforms to protect those with pre-existing conditions from being denied access to a health plan while they have continuous coverage. And for those purchasing insurance for the first time, he supports reforms that empower states to make high risk pools more accessible by using cost reducing methods like risk adjustment and reinsurance. Beginning on his first day in office, Governor Romney is committed to working with Congress to enact polices like these that protect Americans’ access to the care they need

 

[meltzerboy]

Romney also said;

Jim

Jim, was it you or someone else who predicted Romney would do this: that is, not scrap Obamacare but keep parts of it until the public approves of it when other provisions kick in by 2014, and then take credit for it as a federal version of Romneycare by the time he runs for re-election in 2016?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Jim, was it you or someone else who predicted Romney would do this: that is, not scrap Obamacare but keep parts of it until the public approves of it when other provisions kick in by 2014, and then take credit for it as a federal version of Romneycare by the time he runs for re-election in 2016?

Maybe it was me, I believe that he’ll modify it, but not repeal it, which he couldn’t do anyway.

Jim

 

[Julia_Mae]

How did this post end up in this thread?

Mod moved it - fast, huh? I thought of putting it here but then I thought the HHS was such a big topic itself… but I guess the mod disagrees. Anyway,

I was responding to thos former OP:

Originally Posted by CatholcCrusader

                 [forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=9753200#post9753200)                 
             *This is nothing new.

In 2009 the Republicans in Congress were begging for an issue by issue approach instead of one giant bill.

Existing conditions? Okay, pass a one page law saying that insurance companies can’t deny for pre-existing conditions.

Changing jobs? Okay, pass a one page law saying that insurance companies have to keep you on if you change jobs.

This is what Romney is saying. Keep the few bits and pieces that are good (and that is very few indeed) and trash the rest of it.*

I think the problem for Romney is he kept saying he would repeal it. Of course, iirc, a President doesn’t have the power to repeal anything. So, that’s kinda hard to explain away, and now he can cover himself for after he gets elected and of course does not repeal it.

I’m also not sure under the mandate who does have the power to change the provisions or if they need Congressional approval or not.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Now that all being said, I liked what Romney said today on Meet the Press.

Although I thought David Gregory was soft-gloving him when he did the interview on the bus. However he hit him fairly hard in the studio interview.

George Stephanopoulos on the other hand, grilled Paul Ryan, who came across poorly and out of touch with Romney’s ideas.

Jim

 

[Julia_Mae]

Jim, was it you or someone else who predicted Romney would do this: that is, not scrap Obamacare but keep parts of it until the public approves of it when other provisions kick in by 2014, and then take credit for it as a federal version of Romneycare by the time he runs for re-election in 2016?

This from the article might be my favorite political quote of all-time:

On the divisive social issue of abortion, Romney said it “would be my preference” that the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing it be overturned by any justices who he would appoint to the U.S. Supreme Court if vacancies come up.

“Well, there are a number of things I think that need to be said about preserving and protecting the life of the unborn child. And I recognize there are two lives involved: the mom and the unborn child,” Romney said.

“And I believe that people of good conscience have chosen different paths in this regard. But** I am pro-life and will intend, if I’m president of the United States, to encourage pro-life policies,”** he added.

Great. In the future, if he is President, he is going to intend to encourage something pro-life.

I predict he will never say outright that he’ll get rid of the Obamacare mandate that refers to paying for birth control or abortifacients.

news.yahoo.com/romney-says-keep-parts-obama-healthcare-law-155146420.html

 

[meltzerboy]

This from the article might be my favorite political quote of all-time:

Great. In the future, if he is President, he is going to intend to encourage something pro-life.

I predict he will never say outright that he’ll get rid of the Obamacare mandate that refers to paying for birth control or abortifacients.

news.yahoo.com/romney-says-keep-parts-obama-healthcare-law-155146420.html

Some already know that although I am pro-choice, I am opposed to the HHS mandate since I believe it is a violation of religious liberty, as Cardinal Dolan so eloquently stated. I agree with you that Romney won’t touch that one before the election and perhaps not after the election either, if he should become President. For now, he’ll be as elusive and vague as possible, trying to please both sides, not wanting to lose his base and hoping to gain some independent voters as well. He is not only an adroit evolutionist but a skilled tight-rope walker. As it is, I believe the GOP has gotten too embroiled in social issues and health care, instead of focusing like a laser beam on the economy and jobs. Despite all this, the economy is so poor that Romney just might pull it off.

 

[rlg94086]

You can’t be serious…I have answered this ad nauseum. Are you trying to say that basic healthcare is available to everyone?

Yep. You have yet to document a claim that there is anyone who has no access to basic healthcare.

I am well aware of what the clause says, I said it could be argued, I believe successfully, that, in this case, the lack of law would constitute a violation.

So, you are saying that people aren’t getting equal protection under a law that doesn’t exist?

Let’s cut too the quick…health care in this nation is not equal, health is the essential component of life, taking a states rights approach to this would create a patchwork of varying and unequal approaches.

Da. You are right, comrade. Not everything in America is equal.

By attacking the problem at the federal level, we can assure that healthcare will be equally available across the board.

That, of course, assumes that everything must be equal across the board.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Some already know that although I am pro-choice, I am opposed to the HHS mandate since I believe it is a violation of religious liberty, as Cardinal Dolan so eloquently stated. I agree with you that Romney won’t touch that one before the election and perhaps not after the election either, if he should become President. For now, he’ll be as elusive and vague as possible, trying to please both sides, not wanting to lose his base and hoping to gain some independent voters as well.

I don’t disagree, but I was less talking about the issue really than the language of sometime in the future intending to encourage….: It’s just such perfect politicospeak. I actually haven’t cared about politics since they shot Bobby. We get the presidents assigned to us. All the politicking is just smoke and mirrors to distract us and keep us divided and so, powerless.

Despite all this, the economy is so poor that Romney just might pull it off.

Interesting that people don’t seem to know how much the economy has improved since Obama took office. Maybe because Romney kept saying he made it worse. He did not. Smoke and mirrors.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

That, of course, assumes that everything must be equal across the board.

This is a great idea. One size fits all solutions for everything!

Housing, automobiles, food, clothing, furniture, everything!

Everyone would have the exact same house, car, clothes, food. Then no one can complain about being marginalized. No more class warfare. No more envy of success, because we wouldn’t define ourselves that way. Success in America is when EVERYONE is exactly the same, everyone would be completely equal…well, the politicians would be “more equal than others”, but other than that…

It would be Harrison Bergeron in living color!