Monday, January 07, 2008

Romney's Socialist Health Care Crackup

Always scheming, here's Romney surrounded by Massachusetts Democrat Socialists, including Teddy Kennedy: "Romney signed the healthcare bill at an elaborate ceremony at Faneuil Hall, but he angered Democrats by vetoing eight sections of it, including a fee on employers that didn't provide health coverage for their workers. The move allowed him to take credit for a landmark law while washing his hands of something resembling a tax increase." - Boston Globe, "The Making of Mitt Romney" (2006).

Speaking of health care in Massachusetts, don't miss this update on Romney's health care plan here, from BizzyBlog (drawing on an AP report by Steve LeBlanc yesterday):

The RomneyCare Crackup Is Arriving Early (Heavy Fines and Rationing; Also See the Various Updates) OVERVIEW: After one year, Commonwealth Care (aka RomneyCare) in Massachusetts is imploding even earlier than I predicted, due to “spiraling costs.” Punitive fines of $912 - $1,824 are to be imposed on those who would rather not participate in the so-called “grand experiment.”

In mid-October of last year, well before I learned how Objectively Unfit Mitt Romney is to serve as president, I predicted this (fourth item at link):
Let me be the first to say it:
It’s becoming painfully clear (link requires subscription) that Mitt RomneyCare in Massachusetts is blowing up, and will get nothing but worse between now and November 2008. If he’s the nominee, he’ll be playing the same game Michael Dukakis played unsuccessfully in 1988 — covering up the Bay State’s disastrous financial situation. Except this time, the other party controls the Governor’s Office. Deval Patrick will gleefully point to the mess he has inherited, and will then tout HillaryCare II as the “better, more comprehensive” solution.
For this reason alone, I believe that Mitt Romney should NOT be the GOP nominee. Period.

Why is Romney's socialist plan -- which he intended to be his crowning achievement as Governor -- not being targeted by the other Republican candidates? Back in 2005, Michael Cannon of the Cato Institute put it well: ''All around us, we see signs that government mandates and heavy-handed, command-and-control models of providing healthcare don't work and people are abandoning those, and yet the governor seems to be running toward them."

Good for Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee for going after the $50 abortion benefit (which Romney did NOT veto). But now, they should be going after the big-government aspect.