Skip to main content

Home/ Dole Group/ Group items tagged romneycare

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Eli Melrod

Week 10: BEWARE OF ROMNEYCARE - 6 views

  •  
    This article really speaks to why I don't think there is a logical argumenta against Obamacare. There is no more conservative solution other than simply having no government involvement with healthcare. It bothers me that Romney isn't more candid about what "Romneycare" would actually do. It seems from his rhetoric that he wants all Americans to be covered, but that's exactly what Obamacare does in a free-market driven way. The only argument I've really heard against Obamacare is a partisan argument, Republicans versus Democrats. Does America really want to let 50 million people go without insurance or are they just ignorant to the fact that Romneycare would leave that many people uninsured?
  • ...1 more comment...
  •  
    I totally agree with what you are saying. I think that a lot of people are so fixed to their status quo that they can't see the simple fact that with Romney as president a lot of people in America will be without health care. I also think that people forget that the government is for the benefit of the people and with Romney as president the government will not be benefitting many people at all. If Romney believes in so little government why would he even run for president, he should have stayed in the private sector.
  •  
    The middle part of this piece articulates what I like about Obamacare in a way I couldn't: it makes total sense because "health care is distinctive in ways that limit the power of the market." Like you're saying, Eli, the only way Obamacare could be more conservative is to leave government out of the system entirely, and based on the author's description, healthcare itself makes this a really bad idea. The other key point I got from it, which relates to what Jonah is saying about the status quo, is the fact that "competition already exists" in the healthcare system we have now: if the free market would insure more people, why hasn't it done so already? I would like to see a really well crafted argument against the system that has nothing to do with party rhetoric.
  •  
    This is the first time I've read Kenneth Arrow's analysis of why medical care doesn't fit with the usual free market models. It makes sense that consumers can't comparison shop when so many things are unknown and beyond their control. I don't understand why this simple analysis wasn't used in the debate between Romney-Ryan care and Obamacare. It seems like most voters, even those who are anti-big government, would understand and agree with this argument.
Eli Melrod

Week 6: Why Obamacare is a Conservative\'s Dream - 7 views

  •  
    This article is a great explanation for the article that Miles posted last week, "Romney Adopts Softer Tone in Critique of Obama." Obamacare is the epitome of a centralist solution to healthcare, but the Republicans in the house are too caught up in politics to admit that it is actually a good compromise. It is interesting looking at Romney's own plan for Massachusetts in comparison to Obamacare, because they are essentially the same plan. Because Romney has taken up the issue of "repealing Obamacare," he has really dug himself a hole, because what is the conservative alternative? No healthcare plan? It seems to me that this kind of partisan politics is the reason that Romney is doing so poorly in the election.
  • ...2 more comments...
  •  
    This article does a good job of explaining the conservative nature of Obamacare by mentioning how the plan brings forth "principles originally embraced by Republicans" and showing that "because it is not a government takeover of health care," it has few large Democrat supporters. This sentence sums it up well and demonstrates the ridiculousness of the situation: "Mr. Obama's plan, which should be a darling of the right for these principles, was abandoned not for its content, but rather for politics." I am also wondering where that leaves the Republicans, since if Romney is anti-"Romneycare across state lines," what would his health care plan be? Furthermore, instead of attacking Obamacare, he could be giving himself the credit for the basic idea which would certainly help his campaign, gain wider-spread support, and make him appear more the right-leaning centrist.
  •  
    As someone who doesn't understand the details of Obamacare, this was really compelling. I remember someone in the chat room on debate night mentioning that the Mass. plan is basically identical to Obama's, like you said, Eli, so it's more confusing to me that Romney keeps objecting to it as a whole than that he agrees to it in part. Also, Eli, just as there is not really clear Republican alternative to Obamacare, I wonder what the Democrats who are "lukewarm" about it would rather see? I agree with what you're saying in your last sentence, Mabel. It seems like he's already headed in that direction, but should probably hurry it up if he wants it to pay off with the moderate electorate. Even if he can't claim Obama's plan, he could definitely latch onto "personal responsibility" and other traditionally conservative values behind it as more reflective of his own platform.
  •  
    This article is the best. It provides such a clear, concise explanation of Obamacare. And it really does, if you know this, invalidate Romney's entire platform. Obamacare is a centrist healthcare plan, and it's just like Romneycare. Romney is running on a platform of "anti-Obama," and all he's saying that he'll do is remove and replace Obama's policies -- but with what? Romney isn't saying. It really is astounding how much vitriol there is in America directed towards Obama, who is largely a centrist in his policies.
  •  
    This article, like the Obamanomics, shows how too often politics takes precedent over policy. It's very disturbing that when something is as critical as health insurance for as many people as possible, is lost in a political battle. It sounds like even though the Democrats and Republicans agree on the most important aspects of Obamacare, it became mired in its present battle because the White House "rammed the bill through Congress." And the Republicans "lashed back with a vengeance." These political battles seem so petty when so much is at stake and everybody basically agrees on policy.
Jonah Schacter

The Policy Verdict I - NYTimes.com - 4 views

  •  
    The is an article pre vice presidential debate about medicare. It talks about Paul Ryan's medicare a lot in comparison to the current system and Obamacare. I understand each side and there plans for this system. but I think that the problem is the unwillingness to make compromises between parties which is really holding the government back right now. Just wondering thoughts on medicare and the opposing plans.
  • ...3 more comments...
  •  
    I was pretty surprised to see this author, writing an op-ed for a liberal paper, tear apart Obama's Medicare plan like this. The way he describes it, as a centralized and pretty market-free plan, seems kind of unreasonable to me. The basis of the Romney plan was once popular with Democrats, which is interesting to me. It seems like another place (like Obamacare) where the candidates are trying to draw clear party lines around something that's basically bipartisan. In that way, I agree with you: the lack of compromise is at its worst here, where a middle option is pretty agreeable and has at its core something each candidate is promoting. The way that things are being held back now, like you said, is especially worrying to me with Medicare because it strikes me as kind of time-sensitive.
  •  
    I don't know about this article. I'm in the entitlements group for the issues project, and a lot of what I've seen runs contrary to what he says. Here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/81900_Page2.html#ixzz28Akgfkta is a study that says Romney's healthcare plan would leave 72 million uninsured, and here: http://www.standard.net/stories/2012/10/11/study-details-obama-romney-health-care-differences is another that says though both of them will raise premiums for seniors by 2020, Romney's will cause a larger raise. The main issue I have with this article is that it presents Romney's medicare plan as a "market-based" alternative to Obama's "centralized healthcare" plan. This is just so far from true. Obama's plan is based on conservative ideology, and it is based heavily on the market keeping prices down in a purified market.
  •  
    While I have not spent a large amount of time deciphering the differences between Obamacare and Romneycare and the receptions of these plans by Democrats and Republicans alike, I had been under the impression that they were very similar, and the articles Cody posted bring up good points about the intersections of the plans. I found this concluding sentence to be rather funny, "the Romney-Ryan approach might work," after lengthily dissecting both plans and ending up in favor of Romney's, the writer does not even feel comfortable making a declarative, positive statement about Romneycare. While obviously no one can say for sure what will happen in the future or how policies will effect individuals, this just demonstrates the lack of solidity in this debate.
  •  
    Yeah, Romney's plan and Obama's plan are still in the phase of theory, because neither has been enacted. I've read economic analysis that supports both; it really comes down to the economist being a liberal or a conservative. I think we can do as much speculation as we want, but the key difference is that Obamacare worked in Massachusetts, while Romney's current plan has never really worked anywhere.
  •  
    I agree with Eli. Although this article gives some specific information about why the market based approach to medicare could be more effective in lowering costs than the political. They're both theoretical. Obama's board of experts have had much of their power taken away by Congress, so it will be very difficult to see how effective it could really be if it were given the right kind of power. The vouchers lowering the cost of medicare drug benefits is encouraging, though hard to imagine how something like that would work with a much more complex medical system.
1 - 3 of 3
Showing 20 items per page