Romneycare vs Obamacare

B

Big Money

New member
While we won't pretend that Mitt Romney's health care law in Massachusetts was a conservative's dream come true, we will contend that there are clear differences between Obamacare and Romneycare.


The biggest differences are probably circumstances.


Romney's bill actually reflected the make-up and values of the state he governed. But there are also differences in leadership.


Romney worked with everyone, including leading conservative organizations who backed the bill at the time.


Let's take a look at the true differences between the Romney and Obama health care laws.


The Romney healthcare law in Massachusetts featured sweeping reforms that went further than just about any other state has on the issue.


But a clear difference between Obamacare and Romneycare is that Romney’s bill actually had broad support from Republicans, Democrats, liberals, conservatives, and independents.


The bill passed the state legislature by a near-unanimous vote of 154-2 while the state senate passed the bill without a dissenting voice, 37-0.


Compare this to the hyper-partisan Obamacare law that was created behind closed doors, by one party, and where voters were told by Democrat Nancy Pelosi, then Speaker of the House, that they had to pass the bill to see what was in it.


The bill was unable to get the vote of one single Republican in either the House of Representatives or the Senate.


Despite having overwhelming majorities in the US House, the bill barely passed as even 34 Democrats opposed the bill while just enough “moderate” Democrats voted for the law.


Romney’s healthcare bill had the backing of Ted Kennedy as well as The Heritage Foundation.


In no uncertain terms, Obamacare was never popular. It wasn’t popular while it was being debated, it wasn’t popular when it passed in 2009, and it remains unpopular.




http://usconservatives.about.com/od/healthcare-issues/a/Obamacare-Vs-Romneycare.htm
 
Big money said:
While we won't pretend that Mitt Romney's health care law in Massachusetts was a conservative's dream come true, we will contend that there are clear differences between Obamacare and Romneycare.


The biggest differences are probably circumstances.


Romney's bill actually reflected the make-up and values of the state he governed. But there are also differences in leadership.


Romney worked with everyone, including leading conservative organizations who backed the bill at the time.


Let's take a look at the true differences between the Romney and Obama health care laws.


The Romney healthcare law in Massachusetts featured sweeping reforms that went further than just about any other state has on the issue.


But a clear difference between Obamacare and Romneycare is that Romney’s bill actually had broad support from Republicans, Democrats, liberals, conservatives, and independents.


The bill passed the state legislature by a near-unanimous vote of 154-2 while the state senate passed the bill without a dissenting voice, 37-0.


Compare this to the hyper-partisan Obamacare law that was created behind closed doors, by one party, and where voters were told by Democrat Nancy Pelosi, then Speaker of the House, that they had to pass the bill to see what was in it.


The bill was unable to get the vote of one single Republican in either the House of Representatives or the Senate.


Despite having overwhelming majorities in the US House, the bill barely passed as even 34 Democrats opposed the bill while just enough “moderate” Democrats voted for the law.


Romney’s healthcare bill had the backing of Ted Kennedy as well as The Heritage Foundation.


In no uncertain terms, Obamacare was never popular. It wasn’t popular while it was being debated, it wasn’t popular when it passed in 2009, and it remains unpopular.




http://usconservatives.about.com/od/healthcare-issues/a/Obamacare-Vs-Romneycare.htm
Click to expand...

I suspect it will be popular a few months after its implementation. Much like Social Security and Medicare are popular now. People have been lied to about what it is. They do no understand it, many believe it is some government program everyone is required to leave there current healthcare situation and then sign up for.

Once the reality illustrates the great lie was a farce, the ACA will be much more popular. Next June when Sally DoGooder gets to go to her same doctor for the same co-pay, and keep her Humana policy, she wont remember what all the fuss was about.
 
SS is unsustainable. It will NOT be there for me and my generation, not in its current state.
 
Dionaea said:
SS is unsustainable. It will NOT be there for me and my generation, not in its current state.
Click to expand...

How old are you? What you said is a flat out FALSEHOOD. It might not be there in the same form, there will be some means testing and a lower cap, you will have an older age for qualifying.. but it will be there.
 
You forgot one of the BIG differences...

Romneycare was proposed by a conservative while Obamacare was proposed by a Democrat.
 
Jarod said:
No, but it appears to matter to those who supported Romney for president while attacking the President over his very similar ACA.
Click to expand...

It does?

Massachusetts has the lowest percentage of uninsured citizens in the nation.


As rare as it is for government programs to actually accomplish their stated goals, I’m not sure why we continue to glide over this fact as if it’s insignificant. Don’t we want more citizens to have health insurance?


Doesn’t that actually help close the gap in uncompensated care created when Ronald Reagan signed into law the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act? Reagan’s law effectively ended a free market in health care when it mandated that every federally funded ER (which is virtually every ER in the nation) treat patients without regard for their ability to pay.


There’s no such thing as a free market when a vendor has to provide a product without compensation.


Romneycare was a logical response to not only the problem of uninsured citizens but also to the problem of uncompensated care.



http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/292198/supporting-romneycare-opposing-obamacare-david-french
 
Big money said:
It does?

Massachusetts has the lowest percentage of uninsured citizens in the nation.


As rare as it is for government programs to actually accomplish their stated goals, I’m not sure why we continue to glide over this fact as if it’s insignificant. Don’t we want more citizens to have health insurance?


Doesn’t that actually help close the gap in uncompensated care created when Ronald Reagan signed into law the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act? Reagan’s law effectively ended a free market in health care when it mandated that every federally funded ER (which is virtually every ER in the nation) treat patients without regard for their ability to pay.


There’s no such thing as a free market when a vendor has to provide a product without compensation.


Romneycare was a logical response to not only the problem of uninsured citizens but also to the problem of uncompensated care.



http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/292198/supporting-romneycare-opposing-obamacare-david-french
Click to expand...

I agree, as is the ACA.
 
Jarod said:
I agree, as is the ACA.
Click to expand...

Obamacare, unlike Romneycare, is unpopular.



Why is that?

Obamacare requires citizens to purchase health insurance or pay a fine starting in 2014. The financial penalty for not purchasing coverage in 2014 is a maximum of $285 per family or 1 percent of family income (whichever is greater). This rate increases over the years and in 2015 is a maximum of $975 per family or 2 percent of family income (whichever is greater).

Romneycare includes penalties for individuals not having health insurance that are based on half the cost of the lowest-priced Commonwealth Choice plan, and are calculated by age and income. The tax penalty for 2012 can start at $19 per month or $228 per year for an individual with income at 150-200 percent the Federal Poverty Guideline (FPG). Then the penalty ranges to $105 per month or $1,260 per year for an individual with income above 300 percent FPG.

Romney's plan for Massachusetts requires that any business with 11 or more full-time employees offer health insurance to their workers or pay a penalty.

Obamacare requires only large businesses (over 50 full-time employees) to offer health insurance or face a penalty.

A major difference between the two plans is that Obamacare includes a tax credit for small businesses that choose to offer coverage to their workers and Romneycare does not. The credits work on a sliding scale as long as the business has a maximum of 25 employees and pays average annual wages below $50,000.

Currently, small businesses are eligible for a 35 percent tax credit, but in 2014, the credit increases to 50 percent. The maximum credit of 50 percent will only be granted to businesses with less than 10 employees whose average annual wages are less than $25,000.

Both plans contain a roadmap for providing Medicaid to low-income families and expand Medicaid to children; the ACA also extends Medicaid to adults. Here's the difference:

Obamacare offers Medicaid to Americans earning less than 133 percent of the federal poverty level.
Romneycare offers Medicaid to Massachusetts residents earning less than 150 percent of the federal poverty level.


Under Obamacare, young adults can stay on their parents' health insurance plan until the age of 26, regardless of whether or not employer coverage is available.

Under Romneycare, up to the age of 26, young adults can get reduced benefits plans on the Massachusetts Connector if they do not have access to employer coverage.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-burd/obamacare-romneycare_b_1956075.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top