1. Romneycare = Obamacare - the federal government.
The federal government part is significant. I highly doubt that a President Romney would pursue the same health care policies as Governor Romney. Nevertheless, the actual policies details of Romneycare are very similar to the actual policies details of Obamacare. Individual mandates and healthcare exchanges.
2. Obamacare (and Romneycare) is a free market health care solution to our health care problems.
You can love it or hate it. But either way, the idea that Obamacare is a "government takeover of the health care industry" is a gross distortion originally constructed by Frank Luntz, Republican marketing extraordinaire. According to Politifact, which just labeled Luntz' phrase as the 2010 lie of the year,
"Government takeover" conjures a European approach where the government owns the hospitals and the doctors are public employees. But the law Congress passed, parts of which have already gone into effect, relies largely on the free market:3. Obamacare was originally a conservative idea.
• Employers will continue to provide health insurance to the majority of Americans through private insurance companies.
• Contrary to the claim, more people will get private health coverage. The law sets up "exchanges" where private insurers will compete to provide coverage to people who don't have it.
• The government will not seize control of hospitals or nationalize doctors.
• The law does not include the public option, a government-run insurance plan that would have competed with private insurers.
• The law gives tax credits to people who have difficulty affording insurance, so they can buy their coverage from private providers on the exchange. But here too, the approach relies on a free market with regulations, not socialized medicine.
Please see the Heritage Foundation and there blatant attempts at pretending that the individual mandate and the health care exchange aren't their ideas. The political winds have shifted and the Heritage Foundation has found itself on the wrong side. No problem when you can just change your position and rewrite your own history.
4. Health care reform in Massachusetts has been somewhat successful.
It has not addressed rising health care costs in Massachusetts. Rising premiums before the law was enacted have continued to rise. This is a trend occurring around the country. However, Romney's plan has led to nearly universal health care coverage -- which was the goal of the plan in the first place. Republicans would be wise to build on Romney's and the Heritage Foundation's ideas.
5. Health care reform may derail Romney's chances in 2012.
Instead of running proudly on his successful record in MA, Romney will likely spend the next two years trying to explain away his plan, which was the first in the nation to achieve nearly universal health care coverage. A decade ago, Republicans would have carried Romney on their shoulders in adulation. Now, since Obama has taken Romney's ideas and since conservatives think that Obama is a Kenyan socialist trying to destroy America, Romney must back away from his success. In the conservative movement, there are consequences to successful goverance.
6. Final note.
I hope Romney doesn't run away from his plan. We need his input since he is one of the few politicians in America that has developed his own plan. I also wish that conservatives would concentrate on how to improve Obama's plan instead of insisting that it is pure socialism. I have a feeling that my hopes will not come to fruition.