Supreme Court decision: Romney, Heritage Foundation and insurers should be happy
Linkedin

Supreme Court decision: Romney, Heritage Foundation and insurers should be happy

Washington : DC : USA | Jun 28, 2012 at 9:15 AM PDT
XX XX
Views: Pending
 
David Walker - America at a Crossroads

The Supreme Court has upheld the individual mandate as constitutional. As far as I can gather, it is because the mandate is a tax. Romney should be happy since he supported individual mandates himself. See for example here . In a press conference in 2006 , Mitt Romney said he's "very pleased with" the individual mandate. A You Tube video shows several occasions where Romney praises individual mandates.

Obamacare is modelled on Romney care, which Romney introduced into Massachussetts. Insurance companies should be happy with the decision since the individual mandate is a great boon for these special insterests. This site has this to say about the Affordable Care Act: "The ACA is actually a boondoggle for the insurance industry. More than $400 billion in taxpayer funds will be channeled to private insurers through government subsidies of private premiums." So this liberal-supported subsidy for insurers is a great leap forward while a universal single payer system is off the menu.

Of course many conservatives will lament that Romney is not really a conservative, as is shown by the fact that such liberal luminaries as Ted Kennedy supported his plan. Yet the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation supported the individual mandate as far back as 1989, when Stuart Butler proposed a plan he called “Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans.” The mandate is described as follows.

""This mandate is based on two important principles. First, that health care protection is a responsibility of individuals, not businesses. Thus to the extent that anybody should be required to provide coverage to a family, the household mandate assumes that it is the family that carries the first responsibility. Second, it assumes that there is an implicit contract between households and society, based on the notion that health insurance is not like other forms of insurance protection. ....A mandate on individuals recognizes this implicit contract. Society does feel a moral obligation to (e)nsure that its citizens do not suffer from the unavailability of health care. But on the other hand, each household has the obligation, to the extent it is able, to avoid placing demands on society by protecting itself…A mandate on households certainly would force those with adequate means to obtain insurance protection, which would end the problem of middle-class 'free riders' on society’s sense of obligation."

As Romney has always claimed, the individual mandate is conservative in that it stresses individual responsibility..Other, more libertarian conservatives would of course point out that the Romney and Obama plans both involve governments in terms of subsidies for premiums of those who cannot afford insurance. Anyway, the Heritage Foundation should be beaming with joy to find that their individual mandate is constitutional. Even more they should be overjoyed by the fact that their plan is now regarded as a great leap forward by liberals so that they can now attack from further to the right.

Of course Obamacare does have positive features, such as insuring more Americans. Romneycare did the same at the state level in Massachusetts. However there will still be many Americans uninsured. In 2019 under the ACA, 23 million Americans will still be uninsured. According to this site, millions of undocumented Americans will under the law be denied health coverage. The Supreme Court decision is a win-win situation for Romney, insurers, and the Heritage Foundation. The only losers are most of the American people. They will be faced with two alternatives: Obamacare that is good for special interests and what Romney would replace it with, which would be even more favorable to special interests.

If you like to write about U.S. politics and Campaign 2012, enter "The American Pundit" competition. Allvoices is awarding four $250 prizes each month between now and November. These monthly winners earn eligibility for the $5,000 grand prize, to be awarded after the November election.

Sources:

http://healthdisparities.virginia.edu/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/02/07/the-tortuous-conservative-history-of-the-individual-mandate/

http://youtu.be/y6DrH6P9OC0

http://youtu.be/JKN1RC2j92w

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal_government/a-look-at-what-the-supreme-court-ruling-upholding-obamacare-says-and-what-comes-next/2012/06/28/gJQAaqa98V_story.html

1 of 33
Next
Mitt Romney
Mitt Romney
northsunm32 is based in Brandon, Manitoba, Canada, and is an Anchor for Allvoices.
Report Credibility
 
  • Clear
  • Share:
  • Share
  • Clear
  • Clear
  • Clear
  • Clear
 
 
 
Advertisement
 

News Stories

 

Blogs

 >
  • Supreme Court upholds Obama health care reforms

      www.rappler.com
    Limitations were placed on the expansion of coverage to 16 million more poor Americans, but the key payment provision on Obama's signature domestic achievement, the individual mandate, was upheld in a tight 5-4 vote. ... "Whatever the
  • What Republicans Really Think About Obamacare

      ordinary-gentlemen.com
    Not surprisingly, Sargent finds that the one provision — besides the mandate, of course — that Republicans decisively reject is one of Obamacare's most important and yet least recognized achievements, the expansion of Medicare coverage to ... You
  • Right Klik: Tea Party Victory: Supreme Court Strikes Down ...

      www.rightklik.net
    It's difficult to imagine that the party of Mandate Mitt would have had the will to defeat Obamacare without unrelenting pressure from Tea Party groups. Much of the Democrats' draconian legislation lives on, so the Sisyphean battle continues.
  • Will Left Play Race Card After Obamacare Decision? | Bid ...

      bidgovernment.com
    If the Supreme Court next week throws out Obamacare or finds parts of it, including the individual mandate, unconstitutional, the fact that Breitbart's $100000 reward has gone unclaimed should be remembered. If the past becomes prologue, ... When
  • Calculating 'House Effects' of Polling Firms - NYTimes.com

      fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com
    (A polling firm with a Democratic house effect tends to show better numbers for Mr. Obama than in comparable surveys, while one with a Republican house effect tends to have good numbers for Mr. Romney.) .... do include cellphones. Therefore the house
  • Balloon Juice » Blog Archive » 1% + 27% > 50%

      www.balloon-juice.com
    No matter how the Supreme Court rules today, Ann Romney's tap-dancing hobby horse will still get better health care than the majority of Americans and Ann will be able to write it off. Yep. ..... Which is what the 'mandate' argument comes

Images

 >
 

More From Allvoices

Related People

Report Your News Got a similar story?
Add it to the network!

Or add related content to this report



Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use Agreement and Privacy Policy.

© Allvoices, Inc. 2008-2014. All rights reserved. Powered by PulsePoint.