Drudge is pushing a story about Hillary Clinton’s health care plan. While Drudge focused on the dollar amount, I saw this:
The centerpiece of Clinton’s plan is the so-called "individual mandate," requiring everyone to have health insurance — just as most states require drivers to purchase auto insurance. Rival John Edwards has also offered a plan that includes an individual mandate, while the proposal outlined by Barack Obama does not.
Especially if Mitt Romney is the nominee, how do conservatives argue against this? Now Matt Drudge, who seems to be a Romney fan, highlights a different issue, the $110b per year price tag. So, one strategy is going to be price tag. After all, that really is a lot of money.
But once we have abandoned the principle of freedom that is inherent in the mandate issue, aren’t we just, to quote Churchill, "haggling over price?" Don’t Republicans lose when we "haggle over price," rather than principle?
And if Romney points out that he no longer supports these, doesn’t this raise the flip-flopping issue?
UPDATE: In the WSJ’s coverage, they point to a Democracy Corps (D, Carville in fact) poll on this:
A Democracy Corp. poll in May found that 66% of likely voters would be much more or somewhat more likely to support a candidate for Congress who proposed a mandate combined with subsidies. Just 15% said they would be less likely to support such a candidate.
It is going to be very hard to stand against this.
12 Comments
Rachel · September 17, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Drudge does like Romney. Romney was smart enough to hire a Drudge friend onto his team. So whenever I see a pro Romney piece on Drudge, I know the Romney campaign is most likely behind it. Its just dirty. Romney has to ‘buy’ straw polls and even good press on Drudge. It shows in his support. Its fairly wide in the early states, but only an inch deep.
sampo · September 17, 2007 at 11:35 AM
$110B works out to be $30 per month per person in the U.S. The only thing standing in the way of the 10’s of million of Americans is 30 bucks a month? Impossible.
sampo · September 17, 2007 at 11:38 AM
Rachel,
Romney actually hired Drudge? Do you know this to be true? Can you prove it?
Rachel · September 17, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Did I say Romney hired Drudge? NO. He hired a good friend of Drudge.
Rachel · September 17, 2007 at 12:09 PM
Here is the money quote from the article. Posted in Dec. of last year.
-Cillizza adds, “Rhoades’ connection to Drudge is tough to replicate; watch Drudge over the coming weeks and months to see the importance of that relationship and how it accrues to Romney’s benefit.”-
Hasn’t this prediction come true? I say it has.
http://www.potomacflacks.com/pf/2006/12/romney_hires_rh.html
sampo · September 17, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Come true it has Rachel.
Rachel · September 17, 2007 at 12:48 PM
I like Drudge but view all his pro-Romney posts as evidence of his ability to be influenced by his friends. It reflects poorly on his character. Just like the MSM. They tend to promote their favorites. (Hillary)
I just assumed everyone knew that Drudge was biased.
sampo · September 17, 2007 at 1:00 PM
yes, drudge is good on the macro level (across all parties) and pretty detrimental on the micro level (within the republican party)
sampo · September 17, 2007 at 1:11 PM
well, soren,
looks like romney gave you his answer:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/17/364823.aspx
Once again a Romney that relies more on poll tested rhetoric than facts. (europe, washington, and government bashing, and privitization touting).
I’m sure factcheck.org is salivating as i type.
Romney accused Clinton of taking inspiration for her plan from European bureaucracies instead of the American people. “In her plan, we have a government insurance instead of private insurance,” Romney said, outlining the differences between her plan and his own. “In her plan, it’s crafted by Washington; it should be crafted by the states. In her plan, we have government, Washington-managed health care. Instead, we should rely on the private markets to guide health care. And in her plan, you see increased taxes. The burden should not be raised on the American people.”
sampo · September 21, 2007 at 3:09 PM
woohoo i was right in post 2. impossible
http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070921/NATION/109210074/1002
Liberty Pundit · September 17, 2007 at 3:32 PM
This Sounds Even Worse Than Socialized Medicine…
Hillary has unveiled her plans for "universal healthcare":
The centerpiece of Clinton’s plan i…
……
omens and portents: Romney chooses as backdrop a hospital home to the Rudolph W. Giuliani Trauma Center—credit: WaPo « who is willard milton romney? · September 18, 2007 at 11:56 AM
[…] There is also this issue: RomneyCare and HillaryCare are both based on individual mandates. So: Romney’s plan concedes in advance the argument to the Democrats—the only operational difference between the plans is size, scope, and, hence, price, as argued by eye of eyeon08.com in a post titled Romney’s Clinton Problem. […]
Comments are closed.