This is an astoundlingly opposite twisting of reality - evilizing a concept invented by Conservatives in the first place. Conservatives should be so aligned with Romney on this - but it is, instead, a line of attack and great misunderstanding.
A great conservative example of how to do good, yet still use conservative principles!
_______________________________________________________________________
The blind prejudice of some who should know better is incredible to me. It looks like there are some people who are so bound and determined to fight against ObamaCare that they will do anything to fight against any concept that is included in it. But this is a giant examply of distorted thinking, the classic, "guilt by association" mental mistake. The misuse by opponents who should know better is blatant twisting and completely lacks integrity (or is just "lacking in knowledge" or intellectual rigor).
_______________________________________________________________________
BOTTOMLINE
Individual mandate was conceived earlier by conservatives, (and used to fight against HilaryCare).
Cost-sharing imposed on "free riders" is a conservative principle, based on individual responsibility
The Massachusetts HC Law was LAUDED BY CONSERVATIVES as a "landmark" accomplishment.
... Until Obamacare included an individual mandate
And then it became "evil"
An example of "distorted thinking" and/or lack of knowledge
This has been the primary attack on Romney - and it is clearly false.
Conservatives should be supporting him even more, for this conservative masterpiece.
Accomplishing good while using conservative fiscal strategies
Romney's proposed elements are absolutely conservative:
No new taxes
Free riders pay, instead of taxpayer paying
No employer mandates (85% Democrative legislature overrode his veto to add $295 fee)
Free markets, move toward proper deregulation
Followed Fed mandate to switch subsidies to individuals instead of institutions ($395 million)
_______________________________________________________________________
But because both Obamacare and Romneycare concern the same general topic area -- health care -- and can be nicknamed (politician's name plus "care"), Romney's health care bill is suddenly perceived as virtually the same thing as the widely detested Obamacare. (How about "Romneycare-gate"?)
____________________
"Mitt Romney's record on health care is clearly conservative.
Before the 2012 election, RomneyCare wasn't a problem for conservatives.
It wasn't a problem for conservatives when he proposed his health care plan.
There are several fans over at the Heritage Institute such as Robert Moffit, Ph.D., and Edmund Haislmaier. In fact, the Heritage Foundation advised Mitt Romney in the creation of RomneyCare before they flipped their support for RomneyCare when it became politically unpopular to support it.
[The Heritage Foundation’s stamp of approval as being a conservative solution for UNINSURED residents of Massachusetts.]
Many conservatives endorsed RomneyCare. Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have supported RomneyCare.
For conservatives worried about the constitutionality of RomneyCare, his health care plan is constitutional whereas ObamaCare isn't."
__________________
Romney is inaccurately being portrayed as some kind of left-wing outlier, when in fact there were some major conservative institutions (like Heritage) and figures (like Gingrich) who supported the mandate.
Seems it all started with a mandate passed when Reagan was President (the one for mandatory health care by emergency rooms...)
Then the conservatives pushed for the individual mandate, especially against HilaryCare.
RomneyCare implemented it in landmark legislation applauded by conservatives and many states expressed that they wanted to do something similar.
ObamaCare came along and it was evilized. (An insurance specialist: Comparing the Massachusetts program to Obamacare and concluding it is the same is like saying human beings and rabbits are the same just because they are both alive!!!")
