We talked last week about a curious trend: Mitt Romney will say something to voters, only to have his campaign staff tell voters afterwards that Romney didn't really mean what he said.
I'm not just talking about the occasional post-speech clarification, either. On immigration, Iran, taxes, and reproductive rights, Candidate Romney says one thing, while Team Romney says something else. It happened again last night.
Here's Romney during the debate...
"[N]umber one, pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan."
...and here's Romney's spokesperson after the debate.
Pressed by TPM's Evan McMorris-Santoro, [Eric Fehrnstrom] said those who currently lack coverage because they have pre-existing conditions would need their states to implement their own laws -- like Romney's own Massachusetts health care law -- that ban insurance company from discriminating against sick people.
Paul Krugman added, "I guess you could say that Romney's claim wasn't exactly a lie, since some people with pre-existing conditions would retain coverage. But as I said, it's the moral equivalent of a lie; if you think he promised something real, you're the butt of a sick joke."
The underlying policy is critically important here, especially for those with pre-existing conditions (or those who may someday have a pre-existing condition).
As of last night, Romney believes a worker who has a pre-existing condition should be able to keep his or her coverage if they change jobs. There's no reason to give him credit for taking this bold stand -- since 1996, federal law has already protected these folks, and Romney is simply endorsing the longstanding status quo.
But what about everyone else who has a pre-existing condition, including children? As Sam Stein reported a while back, they're out of luck under Romney's approach.
For starters, there is the question of what happens to individuals with pre-existing conditions who lose their jobs rather than move to a new one? Often, COBRA coverage doesn't fully cover treatment costs or last long enough. Another, perhaps more pertinent question is what happens to people who enter the insurance market already suffering from a pre-existing condition? [...]
[A statement from the Romney campaign] confirms that under a Romney presidency, there would be no federal prohibition barring health insurers from discriminating against pre-existing conditions. Instead, his administration would push reforms that help eat away at the problem.
Those "reforms" -- including turning responsibilities to states -- have been largely ineffective.
It's why Fehrnstrom's summary -- let's just hope sick people live in states that adopt good policies -- is so absurd.
An ABC report added that Romney's policy "does not immediately address people who have never had private health insurance, or who have had insurance but spent some time without, often because of financial circumstances and unemployment."
So to reemphasize a point from a month ago, what's the bottom line? First, Americans with pre-existing conditions would be in pretty big trouble if Romney's elected. Second, the fact that Romney says one thing to the country, while his staff quietly says something else to reporters, isn't encouraging.
Leave a Comment:
Well, Mr. Krugman, I guess we'll have to pass Romney's program to find out what's in it. Worked for Obama and the Democrats, no?
Ahh, Blankman somehow I knew you would come out from under that bridge. The ACA - is already helping people, just ask Scott Brown who's children are still on his insurance plan while still in college. I believe that there are some 35 million that, when the "health exchanges" are set up will be able to purchase insurance even if they have a pre-existing condition.
Now, under your example we only have to look back 4 years to see exactly how Rawmoney's non-plan would work - there would be more uninsured, people that had pre-existing conditions would be kicked off, and more importantly those "Death Panels" via the Insurance company would start denying coverage, again.
It's amazing to me how blindingly selfish you are. How you appear to have NO care or concern for your fellow human beings and how your moral bankruptcy has turned you into a shrew.
Yes, you could pass Mr. Romney's program....(Does he have a program? ), and see what it is later....or you could re-elect the President and be certain that if you have a ore-existing condition, no matter what state you live in, you are covered for care.
Hello Zero, still peddling the "we can give people everything they want even if we have to borrow from China" line? Why don't you get on board with my Send Every Household, Ten Thousand Dollars program? For a mere trillion dollars Congress could send every household with a tax return $10,000. They're already spending the trillion dollars on banks via QE3, what could you accomplish with $10,000?
What do you think?
The plan romney and the gop have is no plan at all , just go back to the way it was before the aca , next snake oil joke please
They also have no plan for immigration or jobs , as displayed by their do nothing congress
@!$%#ter , you just described the bush tax cuts , borrowing money to give to romney , who then creates more wealth in his cayman accounts , and zero jobs , you and your party are moronic
The Federal Reserve is independent from the Obama Administration. Quantitative easing is something they are doing irrespective of tax policy.
QE has no impact on debt or deficit. QE1 and 2 did not result in measurable inflation and there's no reason to believe this round wil either.
The aim of any sensible health care plan including the ACA is cost containment as costs are out of control and eating the federal budget pie. Leaving it to states sounds nice but doesn't solve the problem of bending the cost curve. Remember, the GOP was all for it until they were against it because that (bluh) man endorsed the concept.
"Hello Zero, still peddling the "we can give people everything they want even if we have to borrow from China" line?"
Seriously Pooter? Wasn't it Romney last night that told America we'd keep all of the cool Obamacare stuff only without Obamacare, keep Medicare, Medicaid AND Social Security-only better, AND get a 20% tax cut?
AND lower the debt and deficit?
Dude needs to buy a calculator.
"...still peddling the "we can give people everything they want even if we have to borrow from China" line?"
Blankman, first off, I never said "give people everything they want..." - what I said is we've already been there with your suggestion and Robme's jumping on Paul LyinRyan's budget plan! Frankly for the last 18 months Rawmoney has spoken enough lies and flip-flopped on enough issues, and not provided ANY DETAILS about "his plans" that he's not trust-worthy!
Do you actually have any clue as to what an "entitlement" really is? Working Americans contribute thru payroll taxes to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security to these programs that while guaranteed by legislation are helping seniors live their lives in something other than abject poverty, they allow dependent children whose parents may have died to continue on to college - just ask Paul Ryan how that works, it allows women whose spouses may have died to be able to live with their dignity instead of being a burden on their children, etc. - as defined benefit retirement plans have gone the way of the do-do bird and as many saw their life saving evaporate from the gambling casinos on Wall Street, these programs are the difference between some of these people living or being on the street!
But as one of those who choose to remain blind, low-information, selfish and heartless, I guess I don't expect you to understand. And while you may be living off of your trust fund everyone doesn't have one to fall back on!
Agreed, that the main reason Romney looked good last night was because he said whatever came to mind, without being restricted by any actual policy position that he has previously taken or will take in the future.
i disagree that he said whatever came to mind.
Mr. Romney agreed with any position that polls well. i believe this is called pandering, not sticking by your principles...
What principles - this man has none. First one of his staffers have research the definition and than send him the definitions for integrity, honor and character.
In other words, he was lying last night, or he's been lying for the last 18 months.
Well, actually it's both. He lies at random.
And it is easier to remember numbers than it is to do math with them.
It seems to me that Romney may have provided lots of "etch-a-sketch" moments in the debate and that theme could be the basis of a series of ads that would show Romney saying one thing at an earlier primary debate or on the campaign trail (cut to a shaking etch-a-sketch) then something opposite from last night's debate.
I thought President Obama did fine. He answered questions clearly and forthrightly. Maybe I'm too interested in the what the candidates actually say rather than how they look (which may be a mistake as radio listeners to the 1960 debate thought Nixon did better than Kennedy.) Oh well...
I agree, and that's the argument I've been making. Romney opened himself up to some real damage for a short term victory.
Obama didn't have a great night, but Obama supporters need to remember that Obama is a better politician than any of us.
They've run a great campaign, just as they did in 2008. They'll respond effectively.
@Tombisson - That would be an awesome ad. I hope someone picks up on it.
President Obama did just fine. I trust that the American people are smart enough to realize that Romney due to his narcissist personality will never stop lying therefore cannot be trusted. He doesn't know fact from fiction. There are two more debates, so commentators, calm down, YOU declared Romney the winner. Remember, some people take their cues from you.
The states are already crying poverty ie can not afford medicaid expansion, need to lay off teachers, need to lower salaries for teachers and unionized state employees, limiting unemployment benefits etc. How is decreasing federal aid to states going to help? How is sending uninsured patients to emergency rooms going to help? Mitt's answer is either pass the buck or tough luck. We are supposedly all in this boat together but 47% of us are to be pushed overboard to increase the comfort of the first class passengers.
Besides, moving Medicaid on the the states increases state tax needs and makes the tax federally deductible which is a hit to federal revenues. Old age is old age in all states so why not keep Medicaid federal.
Good article about Romney's debate plan by Jonathan Chait:
After watching the debate it was clear to me that Romney was more aggressive than the President. Romney in a sense cut off both the President and the Moderator in speech to make his point, one can conclude that he control the debate. However, the President in my view won the debate because he gave the american people specifics on what it is he intends to do overr the next four years while Romney still could not gave is substance to any of his plans instead what he did was throw out more talking points and tried to walk around the questions put to him. All Romney actually did during the debate was to raise more questions about what it is he really intend to do.
Well put Ben. This is what the commentators should have said, and not sound like angry little children not getting their way.
The president did not do well last night, but I believe Romney's lies will catch up with him. The fact-checkers are in hot pursuit.
Obama is missing a key fact in the health care debate. Romney keeps talking about the free market offering better and cheaper solutions to the issue. We have free market solutions in Medicare and private medical insurance already. Some of these plans are supplements and substitute plans for Medicare. In the private insurance market, Obama needs to point out what premiums cost for a family for insurance provided by their employer. Ask those people how well the free market is working. If the free market was going to deliver cheaper and better medical care, then why hasn't it happened in today's Medicare and private insurance free market? We don't need to experiment with the free market to determine if it will deliver better medical care. It won't. The medical insurance industry has had decades to deliver cheaper and better medical care and it has not happened. Nor will it happen in the future.
What I wanted to hear the President say, in response to the $716B comment, is "Medicare Advantage was a scam and a boon to insurance companies. We ended it and saved that $716 billion."
A for-profit health insurance company will not deliver better coverage for less. I had the experience of going from the non-profit Blue Shield/Blue Cross to the for-profit version of the same. My coverage is significantly less than under the non-profit version. Personally, I do not want a for-profit entity second-guessing the treatment that my personal physician has chosen for me, especially since the ones making the decisions at the insurance company are merely number-crunchers, not physicians.
Exactly , and last I checked our constitutional government of the people was a good thing , so it is ok to ask romney to please not run down america for keeping the elderly out of poverty with medicare , and shutting insurance scammers who want to a profit of $100,000 to help 10 year old johnny if he gets cancer
His claim that america is a massive failure in that regard is a complete joke , where is the free market alternative to food stamps mr romney? Oh that's right , their only job is profits for themselves , so why do you keep saying THEY are a better solution than our u s constitutional government mr romney moron?
When Romney says folks will still have coverage for pre-existing conditions, I think the reality is this: that will still be true for those who obtained coverage under Obamacare. It may or may not be true under whatever Romney says he'll replace it with. Frankly, if Romney truly believes the states should each do their own thing, then it doesn't stand to reason that he will replace Obamacare with anything at the federal level. So, if he repeals Obamacare and then tells the states it's up to them, insurance comnpanies will be free to drop those folks with pre-existing conditions - and they'll do just that on the first day possible. And good luck to them getting coverage again under a state plan, which will come very slowy if at all.
As for kids being on their parents' policies up to age 26: ditto the above. And imagine the nightmare for providers, families, and insurers keeping track of who all was covered, when, and who owes whom what through all of those transitions.
There are no private companies that want to insure the elderly or those with pre-existing conditions. Even if they offer coverage it will be unaffordable. Families are paying hundreds of dollars in premiums for employer provided health insurance and the employer is matching those high premiums. There is no such animal as cheap good quality health insurance that offers as much as Medicare when you are over 65.
Something is drastically going wrong in our environment, when West Nile disease and spinal meningitis is starting to pick up. Romney and the Republicans keep wanting to deny Global Warming and the affects on our planet. Romney talks he would want to get rid of Renewable Energy which would help make us energy independent and start changing the effects of Global Warming. Romney would even kill our education as we know it just to make it worse so we have more ignorant people with no real answers or solutions to our problems can be found just to make huge profits off the government. But no you see to Romney, the Republicans, extremists of hatred, and the extreme wealthy only huge profits matter to them. To them who cares who has to suffer or die from these horrific things that are beginning to happen as long as they can maintain their immense wealth, power, and control over people. It just shows Romney’s attitude, because he is nothing, but a greedy bastard at the cost of the very lives of everybody else. Romney cannot hide under some rock with all his lies, deceptions, and snake oil. Spring is coming again and it is fearful that these extreme weather conditions will continuously get worse. We may get a break here and there, but that is only the calm before the major storm hits our planet. Romney’s plan of drill baby drill will just contaminate our ground water supply more plus the devastation to the surrounding environment.
If President Obama had gotten into the shouting match that some obviously wanted, the effect would have turned off the very voters that Obama is attempting to appeal to. Instead, Obama gave Romney ample space to contradict his previous statements and proposals.
In the coming days as the fact-checkers disassemble the debate, TeamRomney will have a lot of explaining to do. Already TeamRomney is scrambling to clarify and reverse many of the statements that Romney made to the American public. What will continue to emerge is a man willing to say anything to get elected, which is precisely the image that TeamObama wants to reinforce.
kane, they will play the same game they have the last few months , the romney lying brigade take a carrot , and make the press run in circles endlessly , so I would not hold my breath waiting for a competent press to show up now , the romney team are allowed to lie their ass's off , while the reporter is focused on the next question , and the producer is telling them to go to a bank of america commercial in 15 seconds , in his /her ear ..... holding them accountable for what comes out of their mouths is not written in the script of msm
My daughter's boss's daughter was born this spring with a heart defect (which thankfully has since been corrected by surgery). Under Mr. Romney's "plan," she would not qualify for insurance, the cost of her surgery would have been borne by her parents, and she would NEVER be able to get health insurance. I guess she should have taken more personal responsibility and chosen not to be born with a health problem.
Check out the symptoms of a pathological liar. Media won't touch this as you start to feel sorry for Romney but it needs to be addressed because we don't want a pathological anything as president.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/symptoms-of-a-pathological-liar.html
So sorry to see you cover on your lead right after the debate last night. Your other Obamacrats were jumping out of their chairs on how bad he did, but you led with he was "cool and professorial" and Romney was "hyper and amped." Funny that cover did not protect BHO from the Democratic outrage at him being lost and empty suited. Nice try but the Media was furious with BHO's C- performance in face of a well prepared challenger. It takes me all the way back to the Clinton/GHW Bush debate, Bush looking at his watch while Clinton connected with the audience. The shoe was put on the other foot this time, so sorry your protection didn't protect.
What?
Mr. Romney will say anything to get elected. For it, against it? Makes no difference. He's for/against whatever it might be. Reminds me of the old Indian tale. A dying rattlesnake is outside the Indian's Teepee in the snow. The Indian feels sorry for the snake and brings it into his teepee and close to the fire. He nursed it back to health. Feeling comfortable with the snake, the Indian picked it up and it bit him. He says, "Hey, I took you into my teepee and nursed you back to health, why bite me?" The Rattler says, "When you took me in, you knew I was a snake and I did what snakes do." That's Romney. We all know what he is. The debate doesn't change the fact.
Romney took credit for saving the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. Ya, he was here, but he was only a figure head. Frazier Bullock and his people actually did all the work. Romney just walked around, as usual, you know that strut like he has a stick up his b*tt. He took all the credit and did none of the work. Even back then he was lying. He used a bad word and lied about it. A bus was stuck in the canyon up north where some nordic events were being held. It just needed to be turned around, very simple, but no one did anything about it. When Romney got there he said the f word. Hey, it happens. However, after that he lied about it. I think he has lied most of his life. From what he said last night about his sons always lying to him, it must be a family thing. Let the Repubicans celebrate now. Romney will continue to lie, more people will see it. He will hang himself. Romney is a sad little man with a Hitler Complex.
He also took credit for saving the auto industry even thou he said that he wold have let it fail.
Interesting tidbits that could well be true. That doesn't address who was obviously well prepared and ready to lead versus someone not prepared, unable to respond correctly, and generally has been a disinterested Prez who likes all the perks but hates all the LBJ type legislating cause he's too cool and above it all, which he is not. The public ends up with 2500 page monstrosities like Dodd-Frank (didn't break up the Big Banks) and ACA.
I just don't know. Could it be strategy? He looked worn & tired from the get go. Would like to hear arguments for, would like to believe it.
As an aside the Hitler analogy is toxic anywhere & always.
I think the President looked worn coming out because he knew what was coming and frankly even I am bored with tracking Mitts flipping, flopping, and pandering. If the President has to spend every minute correcting and challenging Mitt he'll never get a chance to express his ideas.
Mitt has clearly chosen an old strategy, If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull@!$%#
While there are numerous voters who will fall for his lies, I think it's worth noting that in Massachusetts, where voters have experience with Mitt's leadership, and where the governor himself says they have the #1 public ed. in the country, MITT ROMNEY is trailing badly.
And why did not Obama take him on over this obvious lie? Quote his previous lie, point out this lie, and then ask him which lie was going to be operational for how long?
How the hell hard would that have been? On any of Romney's lies???
The GOP/RNC "Romulian" has many types of 'Mental illness.' The GOP/RNC "Speculator and Cheif" suffers from a Bi-Polar Disorder, pathological lying, social sadistic behavior, and sociopathic behaviors.
One wonders if the GOP/RNC "Speculator and Chief" could claim his many 'mental disorders' as one of many medical preconditions??