The Right Opinion
Obamacare Will Be Romney's Savior
It looks as if it's going to be Mitt Romney after all. With Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush endorsing the former Massachusetts governor last week, there aren't any white knights left to play the role of GOP savior.
But that news hasn't reached his competitors yet.
Psychoanalyzing the remaining contenders for why they are staying in the race is probably a fool's errand. Ron Paul has never worked under the assumption he might be the nominee, never mind the next president. Newt Gingrich often seems like he wants to shake his fist heavenward shouting, "Curse you, historical dialectic! You promised it would be me!" And while Rick Santorum clearly thinks he still has a chance, his dyspeptic personality often makes it seem that, like a character out of "Seinfeld," he's staying in the race out of spite.
But Santorum says otherwise, and one of his core arguments is that the author of "Romneycare" -- the Massachusetts health care reform that was a precursor of sorts to "Obamacare," at least according to Barack Obama and his supporters -- is unfit to take on the president in the general election.
"Frankly, I think he will be destroyed by President Obama on this issue come the fall," Santorum told CNN's John King recently. "And it should be the biggest issue that helps us win this election. It will be turned into a negative under Mitt Romney." Indeed, throughout the debate season, Santorum and others constantly insisted that Romney can't attack Obamacare.
The funny thing is: Even as they were saying he can't attack Obamacare, Romney was -- you guessed it -- attacking Obamacare. Romney has been attacking Obamacare since its inception. "I'll stop it in its tracks on day one!" he promises constantly on the stump.
Throughout this primary season, the urge to sound like pundits has been strong with some of the candidates, particularly Santorum and Gingrich -- probably because they were pundits before they got into the race. As a result, they've imported a style of argumentation better suited for high school debate class. Yes, Romney might be inconsistent to attack Obamacare, at least on the mandate, but there's no basis in reality to say he "can't" attack it nonetheless.
Obama opposed the mandate vociferously when running against Hillary Rodham Clinton, but that didn't stop him from fighting to make it the law of the land.
Moreover, the broader bipartisan assumption that Romney will be hurt by Romneycare in the general election is deeply flawed.
First of all, Obamacare is unpopular (a fact a lot of political coverage conveniently overlooks). That's why Democrats don't talk about it on the stump, and neither did Obama for a very long time -- until the Supreme Court forced him to re-acquire political ownership. If the court upholds the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Obama is not going to want to remind voters of his responsibility for an unpopular piece of legislation. If the court throws it out, Obama is not going to want to remind voters that his signature accomplishment -- which distracted him from a bad economy and cost the Democrats the House -- was so flawed that the court had to reject it. Either way, Obama will not be racing to talk about health care. But Romney will.
It's often said that Obama will respond to Romney's attacks by saying the mandate was based on Romneycare. Romney will respond, "Well, you did it wrong" and promise to repeal and replace the law. All the voters really need to know is that Romney is against Obamacare. Besides, Romney will have plenty of other lines of attack: the raid on Medicare, the rationing board, the tax hikes, the religious liberty issues, the creation of a vast new entitlement when the existing ones are crushing us with debt, etc.
Core Republican voters will vote against Obama, not for Romney. Polls show GOPers are more enthusiastic about voting in 2012 than Democrats. Meanwhile, the independents and moderates who dislike Obamacare, but who are not libertarians, will most likely see Romneycare as evidence that Romney is not one of the right-wing crazies the "Today" show keeps warning them about.
Democrats are truly comfortable only attacking Republicans as "extremists" of one flavor or another. But over the weekend Joe Biden tried attacking Romney for being too "flexible." That might have bite coming from the right in the primaries, but it looks as if the primaries are over.
(C) 2012 Tribune Media Services, Inc.

9 Comments
Son of Liberty
Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at 8:52 AM
Careful, saying that the Great Obaminator is a fool could be construed as racist by our loony left. Just sayin! ;^)
wjm
Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at 9:58 AM
@Son of Liberty Not being in any way PC, I'll just say that the fool Chariman Obamao, and his attorney general Holder, are racist. And they are also marxist statist islam loving liars. And the comments that claim 5 unelected jurists of the Supreme Court are legislating from the bench for striking down unconstituional laws, is incoherence from a "Constitutional Scholar". It also resulted in a homework assignment for the justice department to explain thier unconstitutional views. If they answere truthfully, we may finally get the impeachment they warrant.
p3orion
Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at 12:09 PM
"If the court throws [Obamacare] out, Obama is not going to want to remind voters that his signature accomplishment... was so flawed that the court had to reject it."I wouldn't be so sure. Obama's followers are gullible enough that he could easily play the episode as just another reason they should give him four more years to pack the Supreme Court with pliable liberal votes. I think his recent criticisms of SCOTUS are just an opening shot, perhaps in response to some whispered bad news about the vote from Kagan or Sotomayor.
Orf
Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at 12:29 PM
I fear a repeat of Doleful-McPain is in the making. When the Obamanation says Romneycare was the model for Obamacare, Romney will smile sheepishly and declare it is "different". Wow! won't that impress the voters.If you take Mittens' shirt off, you find a lot of straw. We will see who wins the showdown in November. The establishment Republicans are making the usual mistake and will probably lose once again.
Joe
Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at 2:45 PM
@p3orion,Intelligent voters on the right see it important to get Obama out of office for a simple reason as appointments to SCOTUS.However, in general, uninformed voters, moderates, independents, etc, don't consider SCOTUS appointments as a reason to vote for president. They'll just be looking at the candidates at hand.Overall, I think that Romney only has to say, "You based Obamacare on my STATE legislation? So what? What's law for Massachusetts, doesn't mean it should be law for US. The states have a right to govern it's OWN problems, based on 10th Ammendment."There are 50 states, which call for 50 legislative/contract experiments to deal with common problems, i.e. health care and education.Not being a Romney supporter, I'm now going to support him all I can.
Small Government Libertarian
Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at 3:44 PM
The lame stream media want us to believe Obamacare and Romneycare are a lot alike, but there are key, fundamental differences:1. Romneycare is constitutional (yes, as a sovereign state Massachusettshas the constitutional authority to enact this insurance program).2. Obamacare will be deemed unconstitutional by the SCOTUS on multiple grounds.3. Romneycare apparently is rather well accepted in Massachsuetts and has seemingly delivered on its key promises of universal coverage at lower costs. It could be a model of sorts for other states who wish to go down this road.4. Obamacare is not popular across the nation do to its 2700 pages of legalease and regulations.Romney should take this argument to Obama upfront and non stop.
Peter
Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at 5:07 PM
@Joe. You are correct. The fine, misguided people of Massachusetts wanted some sort of European style health care for all and gave it to themselves. They are apparently willing to pay for it themselves, unlike California and Illinois hoping to get all of us to pay off their public employee retirement commitments. They can serve the rest of us as an example and a warning - a tuition free education. Thank you, Baystaters.
p3orion
Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at 5:23 PM
Joe-I've been stating that to Romney detractors all along, when they point to "RomneyCare" as a reason to oppose him. The few powers the Constitution granted to the Federal government are one thing, the rest (reserved to the states and the people) quite another. Whatever the people of Massachusetts want to do for their health care is fine with me; I don't live there. But whatever they choose, the Constitution allows them the freedom to make that choice; it does NOT allow it to the Federal government. The beauty of the Federal system under our Constitution is that, on whatever issue, the states can see 49 other ideas in progress, and adopt whatever seems to work, or is appropriate for them. That's a much better idea than having our nation putting all its eggs in a single badly-designed basket. Very clever, our founders...Now if we can just get Mitt Romney to make that same distinction, that'll be one big arrow taken from Obama's quill.
Chuck
Wednesday, April 4, 2012 at 8:08 PM
Why do so many conservatives think Romney is going to get a pass on healthcare. As soon as he has the nomination, the MSM will be playing the video of him saying romneycare is a model for national healthcare reform over and over. This will have an effect on the swing voters whether you want to admit romneycare and obamacare are substancially the same.