11.3.13: The Mitt Romney Interview

The former governor of Massachusetts and Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, had some harsh words for President Obama today, with a sort of 'I told you so' temperment to his answers, which in some cases was justified. It was a quality that Mr. Romney was taking comfort in during his talk with Mr. Gregory on today's "Meet The Press." He repeated that the president had been dishonest all along in his promises about the Affordable Healthcare Act in that people who already have insurance will not have their policy affected by the new law in anyway.  That is turning out to not be the case because what the law demands is that there is a baseline of what must be covered, and in many cases, the policies that people already have do not cover those minimum requirements.  The consequence is that people's policies are being cancelled and they have to buy a new policy that meets those requirements.

However, another quality that came through during the interview is that Mr. Romney, while correctly pointing out a negative effect of the Obamacare law, is that Mr. Romney would have not been the right choice to be the President of the United States.   Nevermind that Mr. Romney can not rise above the pettiness in his attempt to discredit Mr. Obama's entire second term as illegitimate because of this 'dishonesty' (a sure sign he is still bitter about the lose), but more telling is that he has never once touted the accomplishment of what he did as Governor of Massachusetts, getting 97% of the state's population insured.

Instead, he only stated that the president had failed to learn the [harmful] lessons of the Massachusetts healthcare law, yet never explained what those were. One of those lessons could be that the law actually worked, and as he had previously said that it could be a model for the country as the current Governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick (D-MA) said later in the program. 

What we're trying to reconcile from the interview is something in particular that Mr. Romney said.  He explained that there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach that can work in the U.S., and that each state has to come up with a system that best works for them.  However, he went on to explain that if he had been elected president, he would have left it to the states but with the requirement that they had to find a way to insure all their citizens and not reject someone based on a preexisting condition.  By saying that, he's put a bottom line federal mandate in place for the states to follow.  What seemed lie a reasonable state is essentially rendered baseless because it runs directly counter to what his party, the Republican party, believes in. As we said many times before, simply letting the states individually figure what to do with healthcare is not a plan, and is not the answer. In the "Meet The Press" clip from 2007, Mr. Romney says in it that he thought the Massachusetts model - the individual mandate model (same as the ACA) - was the best one for the country.

[As an aside, we detest the whole political rhetorical game of repeatedly calling someone dishonest while at the same time refusing to say the person lied.  It's a semantic game that no politician wants to get trapped in, but it's also a clear illustration of not having any political backbone and no genuine leadership quality.  If you state that the president 'destroyed the foundation of truth' or that there is a 'fundamental dishonesty' with the American people, then just say he lied.  Those are very strong disparaging remarks, 'charges' if you will, which also speak to a person's character.  Mr. Obama hammered on Mr. Bush's political record, but neither man has ever said anything negative about each other personal character.  It's worth considering.]

With all that said, we're not absolving the Obama Administration of fault.  There are too many 'should-have-knowns' about the healthcare law.  For example, touching on something Washington Post Associate Editor Bob Woodard said about any big piece of legislation, which was 'follow the money,' the Administration should have had a better idea of how the insurance companies would exploit loopholes in the law to charge people more money.  In this case, covering mental illness treatment is a minimum requirement so instead of adding to people's policies and doing the due diligence to review individual cases as to weather there is a history that would dictate an increase in monthly costs or not, the insurance companies in a blanketed way cancel policies and require people to buy a new one.  It's not the 'right' thing to do, that we all know.  We also all know that the insurance companies probably won't do the 'right' thing.  The Obama Administration should have known this.

Another quick example that would run counter to what Governor Patrick said, which was that the Healthcare web site was a 'convenience.'  We disagree completely, the web site is essential.  It's the face of the entire program and the biggest driver of its success.  If you want the young and healthy to sign up, then you have to make the main method of this generation's communication, work well. Period. The Obama Administration should have known.

Editor of the Weekly Standard Bill Kristol said that the president's signature piece of legislation - Obamacare - is failing and that it will fail while also looking forward to the day that he returns to "Meet The Press" to say 'I told you so.'  Despite the most probably truth of David Axelrod's rebuttal that Mr. Kristol speaks like a man who has already had good health insurance, that's not why we disagree with his statement.  We disagree with him because he roots for failure. Remember when in Abu Ghraib United States soldiers humiliated, abused, and tortured prisoners?  People blamed the Bush Administration, but that was a failure on all America.  When the president's administration fails, that means that the law failed which translates to Congress failing as well.  And that means we all have. Why ever be on the side of that.


Roundtable: former Senior Adviser to the president when health care reform became law, David Axelrod; Washington Post Associate Editor Bob Woodard; editor of the Weekly Standard Bill Kristol; and anchor of BBC World News America, Katty Kay. 


Postscript: Why the United States has 5% percent of the world's population, but 25% of the world's prison population is because this country has instilled a profit motivation to the prison system.  When private companies own the prisons and are driven by increasing profits for shareholders, the number of individuals incarcerated will only increase.  More prisoners means more profit - follow the money.