Of course, it takes a publication like Mother Jones to pull this stuff up, but it hasn’t received a lot of attention since it was published in October.
There’s a curious reference to Teddy having to work in Washington in order for Massachusetts to pass Romneycare.
It hasn’t come up much, but here is an apparent financial explanation from March 2010, just before the House passed the Senate version of Obamacare:
State Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill, an independent candidate for governor, today offered a wide-ranging and scathing criticism of the state’s universal health care law, saying it is bankrupting Massachusetts and will do the same nationally, if a similar plan is passed in Congress.
Cahill, who bolted the Democratic Party in July, has been a long-time critic of the state’s health insurance law….
Cahill said the law is being sustained only with the help of federal aid, which he suggested that the Obama administration is funneling to Massachusetts to help the president make the case for a similar plan in Congress.
“The real problem is the sucking sound of money that has been going in to pay for this health care reform,” Cahill said. “And I would argue that we’re being propped up so that the federal government and the Obama administration can drive it through” Congress.
I blame the other Republican campaigns for not doing the research and publicity to expose Romneycare. Rick Santorum was good in the last debate, but it’s not enough.
It just goes to show how good a job Romney has done at keeping everyone on defense, and how in-fighting among the not-Romneys is leading us down a path to disaster.
I’m confident we will hear during the general election, if Romney is the nominee, how Romneycare only can survive because of federal help and how that is a justification for a national, not state by state, version of Romneycare, namely, Obamacare.
The argument will be that we can tweak Obamacare, saving the good and getting rid only of the bad.
Where have I heard that before?
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Ron Coleman
Comments
[…] of the audio content, I (a) favor Prof. Jacobson’s opinion by default, and (b) can’t figure out what the devil is going wrong with the conservative […]
It is my understanding that MA get about $300.000.000 from the feds to defray the cost of Romneycare. Without the rest of us paying into MA their health care scheme would go under. So is MA going to be exempt from Obamacare if it gets enacted? If so will the federal money dry up because that will have to used to pay for Obamacare and will MA have to have a huge tax increase to pay for their health care bill?
Flipper’s Greatest Flops
And Pam Bondi, UF criminal justice major, former state law criminal prosecutor, and crony politician who apparently hasn’t read and doesn’t understand the current legislation, will do the tweaking.
“I’m confident we will hear during the general election, if Romney is the nominee, how Romneycare only can survive because of federal help and how that is a justification for a national, not state by state, version of Romneycare, namely, Obamacare.”
Not to mention the Dems will be saying how hypocritical Republicans are in nominating someone who believes his state’s similar plan is wonderful.
The argument will be that Republicans willfully tried to blind the American public to the good things Obamacare will bring them. And that the Republicans did this only for political gain since their nominee not only adopted the pilot plan but still says it is a great plan and trumpets how the people of Massachusetts love it.
The average voter is really going to see a huge *values* difference between saying that what is good for a state to do is not good for the nation to do?
Leave a Comment