Obamacare is Romneycare, Why Doesn't Obama Tell You That?

blackascoal said:
"... there are no fundamental differences between the two laws. Both programs create exchanges where private insurers compete. Both require individuals to purchase insurance. And both subsidize those who can’t afford it. It’s a relatively new way of extending coverage. Massachusetts was the first place it was adopted, and the Affordable Care Act was the second. The two laws are, in the words of Jonathan Gruber, who helped design both the Romney and Obama plans, “the same fucking bill.”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...care-differ-only-in-inconsequential-ways.html

Why doesn't Obama tell you that he simply copied a program created by Mitt (Mr. 47%) Romney and the Heritage Foundation? To repeat, it's the same fucking bill.

White House used Mitt Romney health-care law as blueprint for federal law
Three advisers to GOP candidate met a dozen times with senior Obama officials, records show

---

In addition to Obama himself, the meetings attended by Gruber were presided over by the president’s chief economic adviser, Lawrence Summers, then budget director Peter Orzag and Nancy-Ann DeParle, the president’s chief adviser on health care, the records show. Gruber was also given a $380,000 contract by the Obama administration in 2009 to work with Congress on drafting a new federal law based on the Massachusetts law, records show.

The response echoed comments that Romney made last April after Obama suggested the White House had borrowed from his law in Massachusetts.

“He does me the great favor of saying that I was the inspiration of his plan,” Romney said of Obama. “If that’s the case, why didn’t you call me? …Why didn’t you ask what was wrong? Why didn’t you ask if this was an experiment, what worked and what didn’t. … I would have told him, ‘What you’re doing, Mr. President, is going to bankrupt us.’”

Romney is “the father of health-care reform,” said Gruber.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44854320/...-care-law-blueprint-federal-law/#.UkbRY9L9PJo

Could it be that he doesn't want you to know that neither Romneycare nor Obamacare does anything about medical bankruptcies or to control costs?

Big ‘Romneycare’ secret: It didn’t rein in costs

And although Democrats wouldn’t miss an opportunity to tar Romney’s tenure as governor, trashing the health law would do damage to Obama’s closely related effort. But some who are closely watching Massachusetts are more candid about it — and they say it has some serious problems.

“The reality is it performed very poorly,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former Congressional Budget Office director and president of the American Action Forum. He’s one of the most vocal critics of the plan. “A huge mark against it is it didn’t control health care costs at all.”

Health care costs per capita were 27 percent higher in Massachusetts than in the rest of the country in 2004, two years before the state plan was signed, Holtz-Eakin says. By 2009, it was 30 percent higher than the national average.

The law’s failure to rein in health care costs is widely acknowledged by nonpartisan analysts, as well as conservative critics. But there’s more material for critics to work with if either party wanted to use it. For example, emergency room use has gone up, not down — undermining the law’s effort to get that problem under control by expanding coverage
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81837.html#ixzz2gBzJjwig

RomneyCare Didn’t End Medical Bankruptcies
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2011/07/11/romneycare-didnt-end-medical-bankruptcies/

Why is it even called Obamacare when in fact it is expanded Romneycare?
Click to expand...
Where were you hiding? I heard nothing but Obama care is Romney care in 2012.
 
Why won't he tell us that? To preserve the fiction that the two parties are substantially different in some way.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Where were you hiding? I heard nothing but Obama care is Romney care in 2012.
Click to expand...

I've been saying that Obamacare is Romneycare since the day Obama signed it into law .. and listened to many democrats who denied that .. long before 2012.

Bottom line, the healthcare plan that people like you are championing was devised by Mitt Romney and the Heritage Foundation, not Obama. It's THEIR plan.

Starting from there makes this all a lot clearer.
 
and it MUST b e EVIL because of that?

Everyone who knows the facts knows this bac.

the bill is better than what we had before it and will be lessor than the improvements made to it in the future.


stop with the nonsense of hate fail and be glad people are being helped
 
evince said:
and it MUST b e EVIL because of that?

Everyone who knows the facts knows this bac.

the bill is better than what we had before it and will be lessor than the improvements made to it in the future.


stop with the nonsense of hate fail and be glad people are being helped
Click to expand...

Evince, it's basically just a law that we must purchase a product from private companies. It's a corporate wet dream. Why are you such a fascist.
 
evince said:
and it MUST b e EVIL because of that?

Everyone who knows the facts knows this bac.

the bill is better than what we had before it and will be lessor than the improvements made to it in the future.


stop with the nonsense of hate fail and be glad people are being helped
Click to expand...

Now why would Obama take his major policy initiative from a group that supports nothing but failed ideas?
 
evince said:
and it MUST b e EVIL because of that?

Everyone who knows the facts knows this bac.

the bill is better than what we had before it and will be lessor than the improvements made to it in the future.


stop with the nonsense of hate fail and be glad people are being helped
Click to expand...

Now why would Obama take his major policy initiative from a group that supports nothing but failed ideas?
 
Because that idea was created by the republicans to STOP universal care.

they never thought it would become law.

when it was voted on how many republicans voted for it?
 
How very Bipartisan of Obama to try and get you to vote for your own Idea.


so in that bipartisan mode what did your party do to reward him?
 
evince said:
Because that idea was created by the republicans to STOP universal care.

they never thought it would become law.

when it was voted on how many republicans voted for it?
Click to expand...

So it wasn't a failed policy idea then that Heritage and the Republicans pushed?
 
On the republican side ..

How the Heritage Foundation, a Conservative Think Tank, Promoted the Individual Mandate
excerpts

ROMNEY: Actually, Newt, we got the idea of an individual mandate from you.

GINGRICH: That’s not true. You got it from the Heritage Foundation.

ROMNEY: Yes, we got it from you, and you got it from the Heritage Foundation and from you.

GINGRICH: Wait a second. What you just said is not true. You did not get that from me. You got it from the Heritage Foundation.

ROMNEY: And you never supported them?

GINGRICH: I agree with them, but I’m just saying, what you said to this audience just now plain wasn’t true.

(CROSSTALK)

ROMNEY: OK. Let me ask, have you supported in the past an individual mandate?

GINGRICH: I absolutely did with the Heritage Foundation against Hillarycare.

ROMNEY: You did support an individual mandate?

ROMNEY: Oh, OK. That’s what I’m saying. We got the idea from you and the Heritage Foundation.

---

This tells you something about why Republican party leaders have had such a hard time addressing health policy issues over the last few years. Rather than make a prolonged case for health policy that does not involve endless expansion of entitlements and insurance subsidies, the GOP has instead focused primarily on reacting to Democratic proposals.

The individual mandate was an attempt to beat Democrats at the universal coverage game and preempt the what would become HillaryCare.

Medicare’s prescription drug benefit was passed by a Republican president and a Republican Congress under the pretense that if they didn’t do it, Democrats would, and it would be worse. In the debate over ObamaCare, Republicans spent more energy arguing against the law’s Medicare payment cuts than any other part of the law.

Riding a wave of anger over ObamaCare’s passage to electoral victory in 2010, party leadership continued to refuse to talk about broader entitlement reform. And now they’re on track to nominate a presidential candidate who, in his only gig as an elected official, signed a state-based law that would provide the model and foundation for ObamaCare—their top legislative target.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...e-think-tank-invented-the-individual-mandate/
 
It doesn't matter what it its anymore, it's only a fight against Obama by the ordinary people who have been convinced to cut their noses off to spite their faces.
 
monty1 said:
It doesn't matter what it its anymore, it's only a fight against Obama by the ordinary people who have been convinced to cut their noses off to spite their faces.
Click to expand...

You mean Obama knows more about their faces then they do?

How about it's the same fight for healthcare reform that has been happening long before Obama was elected. Obamacare is not healthcare reform.

How about it's a fight against corporatist control of our government?
 
blackascoal said:
You mean Obama knows more about their faces then they do?
Click to expand...

How did anything I said have anything to do with Obama knowing more about somebody's faces?

How about it's the same fight for healthcare reform that has been happening long before Obama was elected. Obamacare is not healthcare reform.
Click to expand...

It was entered into originally with both sides understanding that reform was needed. And in fact the diluted down changes that won't make a significant enough difference anyway are far short of what both sides would have agreed upon. The resistance is purely a fight against Obama and it's completely unprincipled.

How about it's a fight against corporatist control of our government?
Click to expand...

Anything but! Corporations already control your government and this is a fight to wrestle some of it back to government control. It's an effort in socialist control and it doesn't need to be apologized for by anyone. Certain essential services are obviously done better by the government in order to serve the people. Why would you say otherwise?
 
monty1 said:
How did anything I said have anything to do with Obama knowing more about somebody's faces?
Click to expand...

"... it's only a fight against Obama by the ordinary people who have been convinced to cut their noses off to spite their faces."

Should I have said noses?

It was entered into originally with both sides understanding that reform was needed. And in fact the diluted down changes that won't make a significant enough difference anyway are far short of what both sides would have agreed upon. The resistance is purely a fight against Obama and it's completely unprincipled.
Click to expand...

That's ridiculous.

Many of those in the so-called "resistance" are people who voted for Obama.



Anything but! Corporations already control your government and this is a fight to wrestle some of it back to government control. It's an effort in socialist control and it doesn't need to be apologized for by anyone. Certain essential services are obviously done better by the government in order to serve the people. Why would you say otherwise?[/QUOTE]
 
You don't seem to understand what I said about cutting off noses to spite their faces. I won't waste time trying to explain.

But you do make a point that many of the people who voted for Obama are now resisting the ACA. I would imagine that to be true that at least 'some' are resisting and I would put that down to them being convinced by the right's political maneuvers to think it's a bad thing for them. That makes their biggest problem one of understanding that it will help them get a leg up.

You're in a situation now where the Republican can't risk letting the changes take place because that is what is going to bring most of the people on board with the ACA.

Granted that it isn't anything close to what it should be and is in other countries that have universal health care. But it's a step in the right direction and that step is dangerous to the big corps and their status quo. When people experience the benefits they will then be asking for the whole thing. Single payer universal health care.

Having said that, I think there is now a possibility of it being destroyed. The people should be under no illusion that the Republicans will replace the Obama efforts with anything better. That is simply not their agenda. Corporate wealth and 'for profit health care' is their agenda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top