July 9, 2012

Key Differences Between RomneyCare and ObamaCare

The following is a cross-post from MRC written by Ben Collins. It is somewhat of an excerpt from a much larger article called RomneyCare – The Truth about Massachusetts Health Care, which covers more topics than just the side-by-side comparison to ObamaCare. I am posting this here in hopes some will find it informative and a useful reference. ~Nate G.


It is often asserted that RomneyCare is the same thing as ObamaCare, but this is simply not true. It is important to note that Massachusetts, the state where Romneycare was founded, opposed Obamacare. In fact, Massachusetts opposed Obamacare so much that they elected Senator Scott Brown (R) in 2010 to be the deciding vote against Obamacare after Senator Ted Kennedy’s death. Why would the state where Romneycare was founded be opposed to Obamacare if the two laws were really the same? The answer is, of course, that they are not the same. While there are similarities between the two laws, there are also key differences. Below is a table of differences between the Romney plan and the Obama plan.

Overall Size and Scope
-Whole bill was 70 pages
-Romney vetoed significant sections of the bill including the employer penalty for not providing health insurance
-Romney favored an “opt out” provision from the mandate
-Romney favored no mandated benefits for health care coverage, catastrophic only
-No federal gov. insurance option
-Intended as a market driven solution to healthcare
-Whole bill was 2,074 pages
-Very broad regulation of the insurance industry including an employer penalty for not providing health insurance and no “opt out” provision
-Establishes a 15 member board of unelected bureaucrats with great control over health care benefits and risks rationing health care
-Leaves open the option of creating single-payer gov. insurance in the future
-Intended as a step toward gov. run insurance
-No new taxes!
-Romney balanced the state’s budget first, then passed healthcare law
-No cuts to Medicare benefits
-Modest cost to state (only added 1% to state budget)
-Increased taxes by $500 billion and taxes people who don’t buy insurance
-Despite massive federal gov. debt, Obama still passed Obamacare
-Cuts Medicare by $500 billion
-Overall costs unknown!
-Very strong bipartisan support
-Strong special interest support
-Very popular among the public in Massachusetts
-Strong consensus of approval was built in the state to support the law
-Consensus was built to support an individual mandate
-Absolutely no bipartisan support
-Very controversial and divided special interest groups
-Unpopular in nation overall
-No consensus was built to support a mandate
Does Constitution Define it as a “Tax” or “Penalty/Fee”?
-Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts ruled state mandates are “penalties” because states have different authority and powers than the fed. gov.
-Mass. constitution never considered this a tax
-Supreme Court ruled that federal gov. only has the authority to enact this law by its ability “tax,” and does not meet the required standards to be considered a “penalty.”
-This tax breaks Obama’s promise that he would not raise taxes on the middle class
-A state solution to a state problem
-Through collaboration and discussion, Massachusetts created a consensus among stake holders to support the new law
-Federal gov. “one-size-fits-all” plan
-Doesn’t take into account that each state is unique in important ways such as:
1)Vastly different debt levels between states (some states can’t afford new spending on health care)
2)Some states have three times the percentage of uninsured citizens (Much greater costs will be imposed on states with a larger percentage of uninusured citizens)
3)Conservative states will reject implementation of federal gov. plan.

As the above table illustrates, the plan Romney proposed was a much more conservative, business friendly law than what the Democrats passed under President Obama.

The Boston Globe editorial board recently published an article defending RomneyCare on conservative grounds. The editorial board states “the role Romney played on the state level was skillful, creative, and business friendly. Romney was a governor sensitive to business concerns and worried about the state’s business climate.”

A crucial difference between RomneyCare and ObamaCare is that the two healthcare plans, while similar in some ways, present vast differences in the essential origins and motives that separate Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. One author summarized it this way:

We know what Romney’s goal was when he passed his health care plan. His goal was to involve the private sector of Massachusetts in insuring a small percentage of the Massachusetts’ residents [who didn’t have health insurance and who were receiving free health care from the government.]

Obama’s goal prior to signing Obamacare into law was much, much bigger.
In 2003, he said, “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan.”

The fact is, Obamacare was originally going to be single payer. It was going to be European — as close to it as Congress would allow. But that was curbed. What they got, instead — what we got, instead — was the first step. Obamacare. The first step toward single-payer, universal healthcare coverage.

And that is the crucial difference. Romney never said, never touted, never promised that “we may not get [single-payer] immediately” or even a little later than immediately. Romneycare is not Obamacare because Obamacare is just getting started. One was an end in and of itself. The other is (still) a means to an end.

In 2006 when RomneyCare was passed, most conservatives praised Romney’s plan. The Bush administration sent a letter praising the passage of the new law. An often overlooked fact is that without the support of the Bush administration, Romney’s health care law never would have become a reality.

One of Romney’s main goals in passing healthcare legislation was to counter many much more liberal attempts within Massachusetts to take over the healthcare system. The Boston Globe newspaper discusses in detail one plan that Romney feared would become law if action was not taken. That plan was the imposition of a payroll tax of up to $1,700 per employee on all businesses that did not offer health insurance to their employees. It was a serious threat. The plan had been voted on in the year 2000 and the law barely failed by 3%. In 2006 the employer mandate coupled with a heavy payroll tax was to be voted on again.

In regard to ObamaCare, Romney firmly believes that each state should have the right to craft its own health care program. Health care has traditionally been a state issue, not a federal issue, and Romney wants to keep it that way. In his book, No Apology, Romney states:

“My own preference is to let each state fashion its own program to meet the distinct needs of its citizens. States could follow the Massachusetts model if they choose, or they could develop plans of their own. These plans, tested in the state ‘laboratories of democracy,’ could be evaluated, compared, improved upon, and adopted by others.”

In keeping with the belief that states should be able to craft their own programs, Romney has said that on his first day as president, he would issue a waiver to all 50 states allowing them to opt out of ObamaCare. This waiver would allow states to postpone the implementation of ObamaCare while Romney works with congress to formally repeal the bill.

In conclusion, a recent article in The New Yorker magazine states that “Romney had accomplished a longstanding Democratic goal – universal health insurance – by combining three conservative policies.” In other words, Romney had beaten Democrats at their own goal of providing universal health insurance – but Romney’s novel approach accomplished this goal not with a government takeover, but with conservative principles. The success of Romney’s healthcare law led many Democrats to consider adopting a similar approach to achieving universal health insurance. However, the end result from the Democrats under President Obama was a plan with a much larger government, much greater spending, increased taxes, and less power to the states and individuals to determine their own health care goals.

by @ 5:50 pm. Filed under Barack Obama, Campaign Issues, Mitt Romney
Trackback URL for this post:

88 Responses to “Key Differences Between RomneyCare and ObamaCare”

  1. Bert&Ernie22 Says:
  2. Bert&Ernie22 Says:

    Woops, my message got screwed up, try again:

    Look folks, it was always going to be a battle to beat Obama in ’12 — but Romney had a very good shot UNTIL THE SCOTUS MADE ObamaCare/RomneyCare/ObamneyCare THE BIG ISSUE AGAIN!

    Romney is in a very very weak position (the weakest of all original GOP contenders) to battle on that — so barring some new “smarts” and “cajones” by Mitt Romney, bucking his consultants and changing the current dynamics, and making peace with Palin to be his running mate, IT’S ALL OVER FOLKS! (If the country does survive 4 more years of Obama, at least this should finally mark the end of the GOPe which hopefully will go the way of the Whigs.)

  3. Bert&Ernie22 Says:
  4. Enrique Says:


    Good post. Can you please make one edit? IRS.

    Under the tax section, please indicate in the very first bullet point that the IRS is the enforcement mechanism. THIS is the principal difference between state tax and federal tax. The public gets a very bad feeling whenever the IRS is involved, and the public will think twice before asking the IRS to hound them (and ultimately jail them) for an inactivity tax.

  5. econ grad stud Says:

    I believed in the primary and still believe Romney is awful on the issue of healthcare because he thinks universal health insurance coverage is more important than personal freedom.

    However given the other issues I don’t care how much Romney stinks on this one. Romney has at least promised to roll back Obamacare which is an improvement regardless of what mediocrity he replaces it with.

  6. Massachusetts Conservative Says:

    Great post, Nate.

    Kavon, Bert&Ernie is the guy you banned earlier.

  7. LV Says:

    It will be interesting to see how many people in MA will welcome the change from RomneyCare to ObamaCare or if Deval Patrick will file a waiver.

  8. Hello Says:
  9. Enrique Says:


    Yep, you are exactly right, but we’re stuck with Romney.

    I voted for Romney in the primary, but metaphorically, it was like choosing the lesser of evils, the best of the worst, the grand prize winner of the special olympics, a process of elimination.

    I have asked myself more than once…why couldn’t Romney have been Governor of a Red or Purple state? He should have run for governor of New Hampshire or Michigan. Why oh why did he have to do it in Massachusetts, especially when he was using it as a stepping-stone for the presidency.

    If Romney loses this election, it will be because RomneyCare singlehandedly prevented a clear contrast in vision and leadership from Obama and ObamaCare.

    Alas, we’re stuck with Romney, so we better hope the economy tanks.


  10. Boomer Says:

    >>One of Romney’s main goals in passing healthcare legislation was to counter many much more liberal attempts within Massachusetts to take over the healthcare system. The Boston Globe newspaper discusses in detail one plan that Romney feared would become law if action was not taken. That plan was the imposition of a payroll tax of up to $1,700 per employee on all businesses that did not offer health insurance to their employees. It was a serious threat. The plan had been voted on in the year 2000 and the law barely failed by 3%. In 2006 the employer mandate coupled with a heavy payroll tax was to be voted on again.

    This is the most overlooked point for people to understand about the situation in MA. The liberals were trying very hard to implement a single payer system and as noted lost a very narrow ballot issue in 2000 to do that very thing despite being massively outspent by business and those who were totally opposed to it. But they did not stop trying and certainly had the votes int he legislature to make it happen and override any veto.

    Romney actually outsmarted them and worked with business, national conservative organizations and most importantly the people to get a plan passed that was and still is very popular. I know. I lived here then and I live here now. The only thing that has changed in my healthcare is that my premiums have gone up less than the national average since the passage of the bill.

    People who keep arguing that Romney just pulled healthcare out of the blue and rammed it home because he was some sort of statist are either ignorant of the facts or just like repeating stuff they hear from super geniuses like Red State.

  11. Firecracker (Romney/Ryan) Says:

    Why is it when one nutcase who preaches Palin over and over and over again is banned from this site, another nutcase under a different name all of the sudden magically appears to offer the same tired talking points regarding Queen Sarah.

    Jack/Hello/Bert&Ernie22, you aren’t fooling a single person on this site!!!

    Kavon, nuke him outta here and issue a Cease and Desist warning against him if you have to.

  12. Hello Says:
  13. Enrique Says:

    Mass Con

    I’m not sure Bert&Ernie is the Palin guy, but if he starts talking about Palin, I will vote for his banning.

    Bottom line, his comment was correct. RomneyCare is a scourge.

  14. Firecracker (Romney/Ryan) Says:

    Oh and I see Hello is back under his banned name….

    KAVON, we are calling you… ;-)

  15. Enrique Says:


    Kavon, please ban #12 Hello’s IP address. If Bert&Ernie disappears, then we know it was the same guy.

  16. Hello Says:

    Enrique, there is a suggestion to turn things around for Romney (tag Palin as Veep), but race42012 bans any comments on that.

  17. Boomer Says:

    >>I’m not sure Bert&Ernie is the Palin guy, but if he starts talking about Palin, I will vote for his banning.

    Try reading his very first comment again.

  18. Enrique Says:


  19. Enrique Says:

    17 Boomer

    I stand corrected…gah.

  20. Ryan60657 Says:


    I agree (though you don’t need to shout). Mitt will be fighting this battle from a very weak position. He needs to pivot to jobs and the economy, where he is fighting from a position of strength.

  21. Ryan60657 Says:

    “-No cuts to Medicare benefits”

    Can someone please explain why this is a *good* thing?

  22. Greg Says:

    Romney made over 70+ specific campaign promises when he ran for governor, and he kept every single one of them. When he says that he do whatever it takes to repeal Obamacare, I believe that it will get done.

  23. Massachusetts Conservative Says:


    Because cutting Medicare for current recipients is the wrong approach. The right approach is to cap Medicare benefits for future recipients and block grant them the money to make their own health care decisions, like Romney/Ryan.

  24. Katechon Says:

    Am I understand Romney’s position right?

    Big news of today is: Obama Machine of Doom has TODAY transitioned to a new phase of the attack against Romney: TAXES.

    Obama Machine attacks Romney on his investments in foreign tax havens, a Swiss bank account, and obstinate and suspicious refusal to release more than one year of his tax returns.

    While Obama called Congress to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for folks making less than $250K.

    Is Romney opposing the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the middle class?

  25. Enrique Says:


    No one said we didn’t trust him to repeal it. After all, if congress shoves the damn repeal bill on his desk, of course Romney better damn well sign it or else he will be primaried in 2016.

    The point, Greg, is that the campaign cannot offer a clear contrast in vision and leadership from Romney/Romneycare vs. Obama/Obamacare.

    Ugh. I hate thinking about it.

    This economy better keep tanking…it’s the only hope we’ve got.

  26. Katechon Says:

    I know Romney defends the Bush-era tax cuts for very wealthy.

    But does he support Obama’s call for extending tax cuts for middle class families?

  27. Xdem Says:

    Everyone’s in a right panic, are they not? It’s too soon to tell. The ACA poison dart just got into the body politic and it’s going to hurt, if not be life threatening.

    Romneycare might not be as important as people think. They are concerned with Obamacare and will be more and more. It’s not that complicated. Romney as pres means states are in charge of their own programs immediately. The association with the IRS will far outweigh Romney’s previous position on health care. It has a trajectory that no one can predict yet. I suspect a large part of the panic is that the ACA is likely to bring Obama down and neither side knows exactly what to do. As soon as the bill became law, I felt that it would be his demise.

    I understand the fear since the heat of the game is just upon us, but the thing is a monster beyond anyone’s control and we have to see what unfolds.

    I don’t think anyone knows yet how Mitt Romney is perceived. After the Olympics and his trip abroad, it’s going to be a different, more substantial story. If Romney doesn’t win it won’t because of Romneycare. Tell me in all honesty. Do the people really care about Romneycare?

    In a way this massive confusion might be good. When slowpoke Mitt finally gets around to definitions, people will devour them just to be free of this pandemonium. He’s like the main character who isn’t even on stage for his lines.

  28. Katechon Says:

    25 — Economy won’t thank before the election, thanks to the August QE3.

  29. Enrique Says:


    Sincere question. Is August QE3 a certainty, or are you speculating?

    If Bernanke initiates QE3 for the sole purpose of reelecting Obama, I am going to be POBR! (Pissed Off Beyond Recognition)

  30. Boomer Says:


    >>But does he support Obama’s call for extending tax cuts for middle class families?

    I don’t know why you keep saying this when Romney has been very clear on this topic and has been saying it since the beginning of the primary. Unless of course you are pulling for Obama.


    Proposes permanent extension of Bush-era tax cuts for all income levels and dropping all tax rates by 20 percent, bringing the top rate, for example, down to 28 percent from 35 percent and the lowest rate to 8 percent instead of 10 percent. Wants to curtail deductions, credits and exemptions for the wealthiest. Also end Alternative Minimum Tax for individuals, eliminate capital gains tax for families making below $200,000 and cut corporate tax to 25 percent from 35 percent. Does not specify which tax breaks or programs he would curtail to help cover costs.


  31. Massachusetts Conservative Says:


    Yes, and he also supports cutting all marginal rates by 20%.

  32. Enrique Says:


    Honestly, after thinking about it, I don’t think Romney should spend even a damn second distinguishing ObamaCare from RomneyCare.

    You know what Romney should do?

    Just keep repeating over and over and over: “I’ll repeal ObamaCare.”

    Question: Gov. Romney, what about RomneyCare? “I’ll repeal ObamaCare.”

    Question: Gov. Romney, what about RomneyCare? “I’ll repeal ObamaCare.”

    “I’ll repeal ObamaCare.” “I’ll repeal ObamaCare.” “I’ll repeal ObamaCare.”

    Just keep saying it over and over and over until it drowns out any discussion of RomneyCare.

    Question: Gov. Rom–(interrupt)–“Look, ObamaCare is a disaster and I said I’ll repeal the damn thing!”

    That and pivot ObamaCare away from RomneyCare and toward the economy.

    The End.

  33. Katechon Says:

    “Romney supports extending the tax cuts for all income earners.”

    Ok, I was confused for a second. That makes sense. So Obama today endorsed this extension too but only for those making less than $250,000.

    Romney’s situation is tricky now: he’ll have to justify the tax cut for the very wealthy while trying to gain traction from white working class voters.

    Hard task. Especially as Obama is attacking him as a tax evader and corporate raider.

  34. Xdem Says:

    Yes, Enrique!!! Excellent plan. Top shelf.

  35. Katechon Says:

    29 – it’s pretty much a concensus amongst the traders I trade with.

    ECB will cut interest rates soon, and this will allow the Fed to trigger QE3. China won’t be happy with that devaluation of the dollar, but hey !! — the climate is already pretty hostile, so it doesn’t really matter.

  36. Xdem Says:

    Oh, and Enrique. A little sign on his podium will add to the effect.

  37. Katechon Says:

    30-31 — yes, I was confused, trying to understand Obama’s strategy made me blind on Romney’s position on tax cuts.

  38. Enrique Says:

    36 Xdem

    That would be classic!

  39. Enrique Says:


    QE3! POBR!

  40. jarvis Says:

    Enrique Says:
    July 9th, 2012 at 6:16 pm

    Alas, we’re stuck with Romney, so we better hope the economy tanks.

    dumbA comment of this post. Congrats!

  41. Enrique Says:


    NO, that title goes to yours. Saludos.

  42. Katechon Says:

    39 – buy silver or gold !!

  43. Enrique Says:


    That’s out of control.

    We need Ron Paul running the Fed. Yeah, I just said it.

  44. Katechon Says:

    I’m a bit confused again, sorry.

    Won’t Romney be forced to oppose extending tax cuts for the middle class, since Obama is now adamantly calling Congree to pass it? What if GOP Congress doesn’t? Won’t Romney have to agree with Congress? Thus in a way opposing that tax cut?

  45. Boomer Says:

    Q1 GDP was 1.9%.

    Q2 GDP is likely to be under 1.5%. The economy is tanking and the continuation of Operation Twist or a QE3 which is primarily designed to prop up the equity markets is not going to stop GDP from contracting for the rest of the year.

    I’ve been saying this since the middle of last fall and its all playing out which is exactly why Obama has gone so negative and pandered to one identity group after another. Gays, Hispanics, women .. its all he’s got and after months of giving away goodies and attacking Romney’s character he hasn’t moved the dials a bit.

    Obama is going down in November.

  46. Enrique Says:

    45 Boomer

    But…QE3 will create the APPEARANCE of stability or slight growth. And APPEARANCE is all Obama needs until November.

    The media (and public) pays more attention to the Dow and Nasdaq than the GDP%.

  47. Katechon Says:

    If Republican Congress refuses to pass the tax-cut extension for the middle class Obama is now calling for, are you guys saying Romney will join Obama against Republican Congress?

  48. Katechon Says:

    46 – it will also boost exports and thus generate low-wage jobs.

  49. jarvis Says:

    Enrique Says:
    July 9th, 2012 at 7:15 pm


    NO, that title goes to yours. Saludos.

    Clever Enrigue. Here is to more lay-offs, foreclosures and disability claims. Cheers!

  50. Enrique Says:

    49 jarvis

    The only way for the economy to recover is for Obama to be removed.

    The only way for Obama to be removed is for the economy to continue to tank by Nov.

  51. Ogrepete Says:

    Great post, Nate.

    Thank you for summarizing the truth, though it seems econ grand stud and Katechon don’t have a taste for truth.

  52. Dave in AZ Says:

    44 — Nothing will get passed the Senate anyway so what does it matter? You seem to forget that it is actually not a GOP Congress. Quite convenient.
    However to respond to your point Obama is not giving the middle class a tax cut he is just leaving the tax rates where they have been for the past + 10 years. He would be giving a tax increase to the small business owner/’wealthy’/job creators….
    Anyway either way he loses due to the economy tanking further but he should be used to that by now.
    I hope you don’t continue to take the Democratic hand fed line on all of this.
    Bush actually gave the middle class the tax cut Obama is just continuing Bushes rates….

  53. Dave in AZ Says:

    48 – Spot on I hope the GDP goes into negative territory so we can all have an increase in exports….
    I hope you are being sarcastic.

  54. Boomer Says:

    >>it will also boost exports and thus generate low-wage jobs.

    Ah, to where exactly? Have you noticed that Europe, our biggest export partner, is having a bit of a bother lately? China’s fake economy is unraveling rapidly. Where are all these exports going to go?

    Sorry, only a small percentage of the public gives a damn about the equity markets but they do care quite a bit about having a job, getting a raise and the more mundane things like being able to pay their bills.

    In addition to the tax battle that is coming there is the not so small matter of the debt limit about to hit its cap again in September that hardly anyone is bothering to talk about but its coming nevertheless. Anybody think thats going to be good for the markets or the economy? Think again.

    There is no good news coming for Barry so its all personal attacks all the time. Yeah, thats gonna play well for the next 4 months.

  55. Katechon Says:

    52 –

    1) Obama is calling since today for Congress to extend the Bush-era tax-cuts, but only for households earning less than $250K.

    2) Congress is now Republican majority.

    3) i’m only trying to understand campaign’s strategies.

  56. What is the difference between RomneyCare and ObamaCare? « Battleground Watch Says:

    […] the difference between the two healthcare laws. Nate G over at Race42012.com provides this incredible table and plenty of follow-up data for a more in-depth discussion: It is often asserted that RomneyCare is the same thing as […]

  57. Katechon Says:

    54 — Euro is staying strong, at least until the elctions. It will eventually crash and reboot into a more federalised union, with a central ministry of finance, a pan-european mechanism with large sovereign power over the european nations fiscal policies. But it has more room to manoeuver than you seem to think. IMF is injecting a bunch of SDRs and the FED and China are injecting currencies as well — since both China and USA need a strong Euro to export indeed.

  58. Katechon Says:

    53 — gdp is anemic

    only hope for growth besides crazier governement spending is net exports.

    to boost export what does a sovereignty do? Yes, devalue its own currency.

    No, i was being serious !

  59. Katechon Says:

    could you guys anwer me, I’m genuinely confused:

    If Republican Congress refuses to pass the tax-cut extension for the middle-class that Obama is now calling for, are you guys saying Romney will join Obama against the Republican Congress?

  60. Boomer Says:


    The answer is simple. Who is Senate Majority Leader and what Party is he a member of?

    Harry Reid, Democrat.

    There are two Houses of Congress. Don’t believe the Obama BS.

  61. Dave in AZ Says:

    55 – You are correct this is all about politics and what I think will happen is the GOP controlled House will pass a bill keeping the current tax rate for all Americans (imagine that) and the Democratic controlled Senate will do what they usually do, NOTHING!

    Obama will then blame “the do nothing congress” well for doing nothing. What he will leave out as always is that it is not the GOP holding back bills it his buddies in the Senate.
    Hence we will continue on until hopefully we get some real leadership…

  62. Enrique Says:

    59 Kat

    I’m not sure how to answer.

    But I am sure of this. Romney should just not answer the question, dispute the premise, and say to Obama, “Look, if you wanted it you could have got it from 2008-2010 when you had both houses of congress.”

    Don’t answer the question…just accuse Obama of playing politics.

    That angle would have the weight of truth behind it.

  63. Katechon Says:

    60 – Tank you sir. How long does it usually take from the Congress to the Senate? More importantly: Should we expect the GOP Congress to pass that extension or not? If not, it might cause a few headaches to Romney.

    I’m not disposed to believe Obama. I’m only trying to think about the strategies and the battle plans.

  64. Boomer Says:


    The only reason that Obama signed the Bush tax rate extension last time was because the Republicans forced him to. The default Republican position is to retain the Bush tax cuts and then work on comprehensive tax reform.

    The Republicans have been trying to do this for years. Its the Dems who have been the roadblock. Obama is going to cave on this again just like he did last time. This is all for show right now.

  65. Dave in AZ Says:

    58 — You hit the problem on the head. GDP is flat and may go negative and it will bring everything down with it including the stock market and the value of the dollar which in some twisted way helps exports due to lower costs to other nations but the cost of commodities rises, jobless rates raise ect… say hello to another recession.
    We want a strong GDP. Look what happened to the GDP after Regan was in office. This is what we need and Obama knows it.

  66. Katechon Says:

    65 — Reagan and Volker absolutely rocked: policy of the King Dollar.

  67. Katechon Says:

    “This is all for show right now.”

    Yes. And that’s what interest me. This theater of war. Info war, propaganda war. Between Obama and Romney, and the interests sponsoring each of them. I see it like a video game, almost.

  68. Riccardo Says:

    For those of you who continue to see Romney as the weakest of the Republicans to tackle Obama on Healthcare, you just dont understand that many many Americans don’t see this issue the same way you and I do. They want some efforts to control their costs and improve access. Romney is SUPREMELY positioned to take this on precisely because he got the MASS plan done–on budget, with the consent of the house and the electorate and without new revenues. Oh, and he balanced his budget simultaneously!!!! You’ll see in the debates, when Obama brings this up, how Mitt will filet him on this entire issue.

  69. Enrique Says:

    Riccardo, no, you’re wrong.

    The American people have not studied all the details as you surmise.

    Idiot eggheads actually act like the American people have studied every damn page of the law. Hell, not even the legislators studied the law in detail.

    To the average American, the words ObamaCare and RomneyCare are going to sound pretty damn synonymous.

    And they’re not going to spend hours upon hours studying the nuances and making distinctions. Idiot.

  70. Patrick Henry Says:

    Pollster Scott Rasmussen is a national resource, in part because he asks his questions in unique ways that shed valuable light on basic questions of national mood. In his latest national poll, for instance, he asks voters to list each issue that’s important to them, not just to pick among them. And so we see, in his latest finding, that the top three issues that rank highest are, in order, economy, healthcare, and corruption. Bingo. Thanks to Rasmussen’s poll, we see that the three all cluster together. That’s the perfect storm threatening the Democrats: a lousy economy and a bad healthcare bill, all traceable to the permanent political class inside the Beltway, supported, of course, by an archipelago of funders and ideologues across the nation.

    – from http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/09/taxes-and-trust – A good article to make sure you share with everyone, mostly your liberal friends.

  71. njinfl Says:

    On healthcare, or on any topic whatsoever, I wish Mitt would more forcefully adopt a campaign theme he’s flirted with a bit:

    We can do better

    This simple slogan is an American classic, made famous by JFK and interestingly, very effectively recycled by Scotty B., in an ad in which he actually morphed from JFK into himself.

    And make the explicit connection; JFK really is not a partisan figure, but a pantheon figure (deservedly or not).

    So Mitt’s putting on the brass knucks; go one better and put them in a velvet glove. Define Obama as a failure and a liar, but dont leave it there.

    Give the people hope for change; tell them: We can do better.

    Great bumper sticker too.

  72. Patrick Henry Says:

    69. I disagree that Romneycare will ever be a real issue. The left will try to bring it up, but it’ll go Bain on them. I don’t live in MA and don’t care about Romneycare. There are 49 states without Romneycare and none of those people are impacted by it in any way. But every single person in the country is impacted by Obamacare.

    And that’s the extent of how much Romney needs to discuss Romneycare. It’s simple: The citizens of MA like Romneycare. They’ve kept it. They’ve changed it in ways I don’t like. That’s their prerogative. The majority of the country has stated they do not want or care for Obamacare, which, incidentally will impact Romneycare negatively. I will repeal Obamacare and leave the states to do what they want and work with congress to pass healthcare reforms that are patient centered, not political, nevermind keeping the IRS out of your medical history…

    Obamacare is indefensible on all fronts. It has taxes, it destroys Medicare as we know it. It empowers the IRS to enforce it.

    It’s only Monday… how productive are you on a Monday? Sheesh.

  73. Machtyn Says:

    Interesting, in the very article that fully explains why Romney is STRONG on his defense of RomneyCare versus ObamaCare, we have people trying still to say it is his weak point. No, immigration is his weak point. #10 is absolutely correct. The rest of you negative nellies with regard to RomneyCare aren’t comprehending the context.

  74. Enrique Says:

    Patrick Henry:

    It’s about making a clear contrasting vision and leadership.

    Romney cannot make that clear contrast because Obama is just going to throw the word “RomneyCare” right back in his face. Any attempt at a clear contrast will backfire. So Romney simply won’t make a clear contrast.

    A clear contrast of vision and leadership is necessary in this election. And RomneyCare prevents Romney from making that clear contrast in vision and leadership.

  75. Irish Right Says:

    Katechon, what has happened to you? Not to long ago your discussions were cogent, stimulating and I could count on learning something. Lately you have turned bitter, petulant and offensive. Take this thread. You know that Congress is not controlled by a Republican majority, yet you go off on some bizarre tangent. Earlier it was spewing crap about the LDS Church. I’d almost bet that your I.D. was stolen.

  76. Dave Says:

    We covered the points in the post, and those that aren’t, ad infinitum, ad nauseum in previous years. It’s amazing how long it took. The bottom line is that there is no similarity of any substance between what Romney did and what Obama is trying to implement.

    Zero. Zilch. Nada.

    To fail to see this is tantamount to a confession of monumental stupidity.

  77. Enrique Says:

    Dave, you said:

    “To fail to see this is tantamount to a confession of monumental stupidity.”

    No, you are wrong.

    The average voter is not monumentally stupid. The average voter, is, however, low information.

    And the low information that they are exposed to will make it appear that RomneyCare=ObamaCare both in optics and big ideas (e.g., mandate, etc.).

    Obama will be easily able to deceive low information voters into believing that RomneyCare=ObamaCare.

  78. Katechon Says:

    75- “Congress is not controlled by a Republican majority”

    The House is.

    “Earlier it was spewing crap about the LDS Church. ”

    I was only asking questions I deemed relevant when trying to project the trajectory of the race.

    – Joe Smith accused of treason: could this come up?
    – Joe Smith being a freemason. Jerald, God bless his soul, reminded me that the Founding Fathers were freemasons too, so no, it won’t be an issue.
    – Joe Smith being a polygam, married to womens who were also married to other mens at the same time. I was wondering if this could be an issue.

    I’m learning about LDS, I don’t know nothing about it, and was inquiring about it here since it’s relevant to the race, and this website is frequented by Mormons I “know” and who have been extremely gracious and generous in the past.

  79. RomneyCare vs. ObamaCare – The Key Differences Are Significant | FavStocks Says:

    […] as Gunderson’s table illustrates, the plan Romney proposed was a much more conservative, business friendly law than what the […]

  80. Jerald Says:

    Nice to see you post again Nate.

  81. Remember ObamaCrapCare Screws The State First & Foremost « Mcnorman's Weblog Says:

    […] Key differences between ObamaCare Tax and Romneycare. Like this:LikeBe the first to like this.   […]

  82. K.G. Says:

    #77 – Enrique

    The average voter is not monumentally stupid. The average voter, is, however, low information.

    Stupid or ignorant, it’s a problem.

    It’s just not a matter of “informing” an uninformed voter. More than half of voters just have wrong-headed notions stuck in their head and dynamite couldn’t blast them loose. Over and over we have to point out that the the Left owns the propaganda outlets, especially the schools. Most people’s self-evident truths are lies.

    Mark Twain: “It’s a lot easier to fool people in the first place than convince them they’ve been fooled.” And Winston Churchill: “The best case against democracy is five minutes with the average voter.”

    There are straight-thinkers and goofy-thinkers and a lot of goofy thinkers vote. Couple that with the fact that the worse the economy is the more people will vote for Dems and their safety net, the nation’s children and their future be damned.

  83. Ci2Eye Says:

    I didn’t see this article mentioned but Mona Charen also outlines some important points about Romney’s instincts and original intent with healthcare reform in Massachusetts.


  84. Dave in AZ Says:

    78 – Katechon

    You will find all kinds of miss information on the web about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints often referred to as the Mormon’s. The best place to ask and recieve answeres to your questions is from the link below.


    I suggest if you want to know you find out from the source.

  85. Gunlock Bill Says:

    78. “- Joe Smith accused of treason: could this come up?”

    So was Jesus, so what? Being “accused” is a far cry from being “convicted”.

    BTW, calling him “Joe Smith” is what people who want to disrespect Mormons and Mormonism do. The rest of us don’t call him that.

    “- Joe Smith being a polygam, married to womens who were also married to other mens at the same time. I was wondering if this could be an issue.”

    This is the classic conflation of two different concepts (always done by the Anti-Mormons). Joseph Smith was “sealed” to women who were married to other men. These were NOT the same as consummated marriages. But the Antis don’t want to distinguish the difference so they can make things sound bad.

    Anti-Mormons aren’t reliable sources of information.

  86. aspire Says:

    I don’t like it when people say there was nothing bipartisan about Obamacare – there was bipartisan votes against it.

  87. Romney camp touts...Romneycare??? - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum Says:

    […] really think Romney care and Obama care are the same? You aren't allowed to vote right? Key Differences Between RomneyCare and ObamaCare | Race 4 2012 […]

  88. Katie Says:

    Listen Romneycare only had to support ONE state! Obamacare had to support FIFTY states! Obama made the unemployment rate decreese and really pulled the government out of the whole! Romney makes $21.6 million a year and only pays 13% on taxes. Someone I know who makes $100 thousand a year who pays 16% on taxes! That is CRAZY!

Join The Community

Sponsored Ad


Recent Posts

Sponsored Ad





Site Syndication