From T&T

I know here that you will agree with me that standing up for America also means standing up for the God who has so blessed our land. . I believe it longs to see traditional values reflected in public policy again. To those who cite the First Amendment as reason for excluding God from more and more of our institutions and everyday life, may I just say: The First Amendment of the Constitution was not written to protect the people of this country from religious values; it was written to protect religious values from government tyranny."

-President Ronald Reagan

"If  we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone  under." - Ronald Reagan  

Cartoons By Michael Ramirez

Cartoons By Michael Ramirez

Fred Update



August 30, 2007
Read More: F. Thompson

Sources: Thompson to announce Sept. 6th

Fred Thompson's campaign-in-waiting will hold a 4 p.m. conference call today with supporters to brief them on plans for the former Tennessee senator's presidential announcement next week, according to an e-mail obtained by Politico.com.

Randy Enwright, Thompson's political director, said in the message that they will "discuss the next steps as we move forward as an organization." A Thompson aide confirms that they'll share the news about the long-awaited formal launch. "By the end of the day, we'll have more clarity," the aide said, declining to reveal which day the announcement would take place.

UPDATE: Still no official confirmation from the campaign, but Thompson sources now confirm that he will announce his candidacy next Thursday, Sept. 6. The launch will include a tour of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida. As expected, Thompson will not appear at the GOP debate in New Hampshire on Wednesday, Sept. 5.  

It's the announcement of the announcement about the announcement for the announcement. Fred, are you being forced against your will to run? I mean tell us now. You act as if there is a gun to your head.

Posted By: Craig | August 30, 2007 at 11:18 AM     

abuse iconREPORT ABUSE


So Fred is holding a press conference to state the date of a press conference where he might state his intentions in regard to the presidential race? Yawn.

Posted By: George P. | August 30, 2007 at 11:22 AM     

If Fred Thompson's presidency is going to be masked in as much ambiguous uncertainty as his bid(?) for the white house, count me out. This guy makes George Bush look like a sure-footed transparent leader.

Posted By: Frank | August 30, 2007 at 11:48 AM     
Mr. Thompson, pleeease. An announcement to tell us when you are going to announce that you are a formal candidate. Just do it when you want. Despite your lack of executive/managerial experience, you were the person I hoped would get in the race long before the idea of a Thompson candidacy was mentioned in any of the media. I must say, however, you are beginning to make me a little nervous. If you are getting in a row all of your ducks, fine. Do make sure a solid campaign system is in place. But if there is any reluctance whatsoever on your part concerning entering the race, then please do America and the Republican party a favor and don't do it.

Posted By: dtomaselli@bmpllp.com | August 30, 2007 at 11:53 AM     
Fred thanks for coming to the party. Unfortunately the party is over..........Today Rasmussen Reports on daily president tracking poll shows Fred at 18% and Mitt at 16%. The 18% is the lowest poll rating for Fred to date. Turn out the lights the party is over.

Posted By: perception50 | August 30, 2007 at 11:58 AM     
Fred is just a little lazy. Everyone just relax. He's already played a president on T.V. so he's all set.

Posted By: eatme | August 30, 2007 at 12:13 PM     
Tim, I get your point and will vote for Fred in a heartbeat if he's nominated. But it's partly a matter of perception. The delays and staff turnovers don't look good. That negative image will hold over into the general election.

Posted By: VDS | August 30, 2007 at 12:25 PM  
running his own kids won't vote for, and the other a Morman?? Fred's got my vote when he comes into the race! VP Ted Nuggent??

Posted By: bruce | August 30, 2007 at 12:29 PM     
How dare some people on here compare Fred to Reagan seriously how dare you! A senator who was known for not really doing anything. An tall actor on a mediocre show. A foot dragging undeclared candidate. Please his advisers are keeping him out because they know how weak he is. Rudy, McCain, and Romney will run circles around this guy in a debate.

Posted By: JMTS25 | August 30, 2007 at 12:30 PM   

Gov. Romney: I've Learned How To Get The Job Done

CNN: Romney Harnessing Creativity Of Web Users

Norquist: Gov. Romney First Candidate To Sign No Tax Pledge

CFG's Toomey On Gov. Romney's Pro-Growth Record

 

posted at 12:00 pm on August 29, 2007 by Bryan
Send to a Friend | printer-friendly

This is from Tuesday's show. Laura interviews Gov. Romney about the Craig scandal and Washington's corrupt culture, sanctuary cities, campaign prognostication, the rise of China and more. No fireworks, but the Gov comes across like a polished, informed statesman. And he takes a mild shot or two at Rudy Giuliani.
 
Click here for the link.

Reagan Says Thompson is No Reagan

President Reagan's son Michael Reagan appeared on Your World with Neil Cavuto recently to talk about the '08 presidential election. He took issue with people comparing former Senator Fred Thompson to his father. He said:


When you went to a Ronald Reagan speech, and you listened to it, if you listened to one of them or all of them, you always felt the speech he just got done giving was the greatest speech he had ever given. And you would follow him to the moon if he'd have led you there after the speech – and I'm not seeing that in Fred Thompson at all. I see no call.
Reagan, who claims not to have a "horse " in this race, says, "I think the lower-tier that nobody gives any credit to, the Huckabees the Hunters – I think they offer something."

Reagan could not seem to find anything he liked about Thompson other than the fact that he was an actor. One statement he made in particular struck me as insightful, " When people hear Fred speak, I'm still not getting that 'wow' factor – 'Wow'! Fred Thompson's going to lead us where?"
 

More Staff Trouble in Thompson Campaign

Chris Cillizza's Politics Blog -- The Fix

washingtonpost.com's Politics Blog

 
Linda Rozett, the communications director for former Sen. Fred Thompson's (R-Tenn.) presidential bid, has left the campaign, according to an internal e-mail obtained by The Fix.

"It is my duty to let you know that Linda Rozett is no longer with our committee," wrote campaign manager Bill Lacy. "I will have to make a lot of tough decisions to make our venture successful, and this was one of them. Linda is a talented, professional and gracious lady who will be missed."

He added: "But in the limited amount of time we have I feel it critical to have a communications point person with significant campaign experience."

Rozett's departure follows that of press secretary Burson Snyder last week.

Leadership That Empowered Individuals

By: Tim Murphy
Townhall
Friday, Aug 24, 2007

"In April 2006, Massachusetts passed historic legislation aiming to increase dramatically the number of people covered by health insurance. While only in effect since July 2007, the early signs are encouraging. More people are signing up for affordable private insurance plans. Massachusetts is leading the way in the effort to provide all citizens the opportunity to purchase affordable health insurance. This landmark achievement is due in no small part to Governor Mitt Romney and his strong leadership, working in cooperation with the legislature.

"Fewer Republican presidential candidates are better prepared to meet our nation's health care challenge than Governor Romney. Health care is a complex issue and tackling it is no easy task, as politicians from across the country have discovered. Yet, Governor Romney brought together all sides to find a solution that at its heart advances individual choice and responsibility, and free-market principles.

"Under Governor Romney's plan in Massachusetts, state citizens are empowered to enter the private market and obtain their own health insurance. Personal responsibility is the defining principle of his plan. To facilitate movement towards a free-market, Governor Romney's reforms created a new insurance marketplace and provide subsidies to lower-income state citizens to obtain their own private plan." 

...

"Beyond this, Governor Romney took additional steps to limit government's role in health care. He vetoed a Democrat proposed $295 per employee fee for businesses that fail to offer insurance. While the State Legislature did not adopt all of Governor Romney's free-market proposals, he did make progress in helping insurers create lower-cost plans by modernizing our insurance markets." 

...

"At the heart of Governor Romney's plan in Massachusetts is a core belief that the solution to the challenge of reforming the health care system lies in private market solutions. What we have done in Massachusetts is unleash the power of competition. For the first time, many Massachusetts citizens are buying their own health care plans. This was achieved not by putting the government in the health care business but instead by empowering individuals."

Tim Murphy is the former Massachusetts Health And Human Services Secretary

View Full Article

David of Elect Romney in 08: “Flip flop” whack-a-mole

By David | August 23, 2007 - 6:05 pm - Posted in Analysis, Commentary, and Editorials , 2008, Competitors, Abortion Edit

Sometimes I feel like we are playing whack-a-mole (you know, the carnival arcade game) with the whole "Mitt's a flip-flopper" meme in the MSM (and from rival campaigns).

The latest concerns some comments Mitt made recently about overturning RvW and giving the Abortion decision back to the states and how that might be inconsistent with supporting the GOP platform advocating a Human Life Amendment.

Having followed Mitt closely, I think it's clear that these are not mutually exclusive, but rather two phases of a long-term change effort. Rather than just give you my opinion, however, I'll let a couple well known right-wing bloggers weigh in more eloquently.

Marc Ambinder of the Atlantic states it well:

"Mitt Romney is simply struggling to explain the Republican Party's conventional pro-life position. Which is: overturn Roe v. Wade. And then, slowly build up public support for a constitutional amendment banning abortions. ETA: 30 years or more.

This is not a flip-flop.

The reason why Romney is struggling to explain the complicated two-step is that he is relatively new to the dance. Pro-life activists who have been in the trenches for years are very comfortable with the nuance and subtlely of their beliefs and know how to translate them into morsels for the media's consumption. This measured, incremental approach — relatively new to the movement — has been successful in many ways."

Next, here's Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review:

"I know it's cool on all sides not to trust Romney, but this strikes me as no there there, despite the reporter's contention otherwise. He supports a human life amendment but lives in the incremental real world. If Roe is overturned, states will take up the issue. If Roe is overturned, it would be helpful to have a president who supports a federal ban, and who will presumably support those trying to ban abortion in their states (something worth hearing him make clear he would). Romney's position makes sense to me.

Sorry, no "waffle."

A pro-life, pro-Romney friend on the Hill sends me this:

The piece this morning is a regurgitated hit piece. The same "hit" took place on August 6 when Mitt appeared on GMA. Romney's position is quite simple: Romney says, "I am pro-life, I support a ban on all-abortions, but since that doesn't seem likely to pass, our immediate goal must be to overturn Roe V Wade and return the law to the states."

Neither of these folks is particularly known as a Romney apologist…they seem to be very fair analyses of what's going on here.

The MSM is what it is…I'm not expecting much from them. For the rival campaigns, however, my question is why don't they try differentiating themselves with positive messages regarding their competence, experience, track-record of results, etc. instead of demonstrating how intolerant the Right can be for folks who come around to our pro-life position (better late than never).

Perhaps if those things were the primary criteria for President, Mitt would clean their clocks?

Sphere: Related Content

Tim Murphy Discusses Governor Romney's Health Care Record

Former Massachusetts Health and Human Services Secretary Tim Murphy on Governor Romney's record of conservative principles in health care.

Rally For Romney

Club for Growth on Huckabee

Lopez: You've hit Mike Huckabee hard. Is there a point to that? One assumes he won't be the nominee?

Toomey: There is no question that Mike Huckabee is a charismatic politician, but Governor Huckabee is attempting to use his charisma to hoodwink American voters and the media with respect to his economic record. While there is little chance of Governor Huckabee catapulting into the coveted first tier, he is being discussed as a viable vice-presidential pick, especially if the eventual nominee needs a social conservative to shore up the conservative base. The Club for Growth's original observations about Huckabee's tax-and-spend record have been born out in recent weeks as Huckabee embraced a new brand of lefty populism and class warfare rhetoric that one often hears from Democrats. It is important for the Club for Growth to continue to push to clarify the true nature Mike Huckabee's economic record and policies.

Governor Mitt Romney and Abortion

Governor Mitt Romney and Abortion

 


Abortion Questions for Governor Mitt Romney

 

Abortion

  1. George Stephanopoulos
    1. So do you now believe that abortion is murder?
    2. Should women who have abortions and doctors who perform them be jailed?
    3. If it's killing, why should states have leeway?
    4. What do you believe the punishment should be for an abortion?
  2. Wolf Blitzer
    1. Have you changed your opinion on Abortion?
    2. What is your current position on abortion?
    3. How do you account for your change on abortion ?
  3. 1st Debate
    1. Would it be a good day for America if Roe v Wade was repealed?
    2. Have you always been for life or effectively pro-choice?
    3. When you said that being a pro-life president entails more than just appointing strict constructionist judges, was that directed at Giuliani?
  4. 2nd Debate
    1. What would you say to someone who lost a wife or a daughter to an illegal abortion if you named the Supreme Court justice who tipped the balance and over turned Roe v Wade?
    2. Governor Romney, during this campaign, you have been criticized -- and again tonight you've been criticized -- for changing your position on some issues. You say that it's a part of learning from experience. Can you point to an area in which your learning from experience led you to change to a position that is less popular with the Republican base?
  5. Katherine Jean Lopez
    1. Were you faking it when you said you were pro-choice ?
  6. Dan Balz, David S Broder and Ruth Marcus
    1. Do you support making abortion illegal?
  7. Mary Katharine Ham
    1. What do you think about the partial-birth abortion ban ?
  8. Mike Allen
    1. What policies would you initiate to show your sincerity?

Mitt Romney and Abortion News


Speeches and Editorials from Romney on Life

* Why I vetoed contraception bill, 07-26-2005, Boston Globe, Governor Mitt Romney

Quotes from Governor Mitt Romney on Roe vs. Wade

 

2005

 

  • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "Let's let the states deal with it through a democratic process, rather than have a judiciary make a pronouncement of one size fits all."
    • Governor Mitt Romney

 

 

  • Romney has been a vocal opponent of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, criticizing the "one size fits all" statute created by the ruling. The Governor believes each state should have the right to determine its own abortion laws, voicing support for efforts in states such as South Dakota to regulate abortion within its borders.

 

  • "YESTERDAY I vetoed a bill that the Legislature forwarded to my desk. Though described by its sponsors as a measure relating to contraception, there is more to it than that. The bill does not involve only the prevention of conception: The drug it authorizes would also terminate life after conception."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "Signing such a measure into law would violate the promise I made to the citizens of Massachusetts when I ran for governor. I pledged that I would not change our abortion laws either to restrict abortion or to facilitate it. What's more, this particular bill does not require parental consent even for young teenagers. It disregards not only the seriousness of abortion but the importance of parental involvement and so would weaken a protection I am committed to uphold."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "I have spoken with medical professionals to determine whether the drug contemplated under the bill would simply prevent conception or whether it would also terminate a living embryo after conception. Once it became clear that the latter was the case, my decision was straightforward. I will honor the commitment I made during my campaign: While I do not favor abortion, I will not change the state's abortion laws."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "I understand that my views on laws governing abortion set me in the minority in our Commonwealth. I am prolife. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "Because Massachusetts is decidedly prochoice, I have respected the state's democratically held view. I have not attempted to impose my own views on the prochoice majority."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "For all the conflicting views on this issue, it speaks well of our country that we recognize abortion as a problem. The law may call it a right, but no one ever called it a good, and, in the quiet of conscience people of both political parties know that more than a million abortions a year cannot be squared with the good heart of America."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "You can't be a prolife governor in a prochoice state without understanding that there are heartfelt and thoughtful arguments on both sides of the question. Many women considering abortions face terrible pressures, hurts, and fears; we should come to their aid with all the resourcefulness and empathy we can offer. At the same time, the starting point should be the innocence and vulnerability of the child waiting to be born."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005 , Boston Globe

 

  • "In some respects, these convictions have evolved and deepened during my time as governor. In considering the issue of embryo cloning and embryo farming, I saw where the harsh logic of abortion can lead -- to the view of innocent new life as nothing more than research material or a commodity to be exploited."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "I have also observed the bitterness and fierce anger that still linger 32 years after Roe v. Wade. The majority in the US Supreme Court's Casey opinion assured us this would pass away as Americans learned to live with abortion on demand. But this has proved a false hope."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "There is much in the abortion controversy that America's founders would not recognize. Above all, those who wrote our Constitution would wonder why the federal courts had peremptorily removed the matter from the authority of the elected branches of government. The federal system left to us by the Constitution allows people of different states to make their own choices on matters of controversy, thus avoiding the bitter battles engendered by one size fits all" judicial pronouncements. A federalist approach would allow such disputes to be settled by the citizens and elected representatives of each state, and appropriately defer to democratic governance."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005 , Boston Globe

 

  • "Except on matters of the starkest clarity like the issue of banning partial-birth abortions, there is not now a decisive national consensus on abortion. Some parts of the country have prolife majorities, others have prochoice majorities. People of good faith on both sides of the issue should be able to make and advance their case in democratic forums -- with civility, mutual respect, and confidence that democratic majorities will prevail. We will never have peace on the abortion issue, much less a consensus of conscience, until democracy is allowed to work its way."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, "Why I vetoed contraception bill", 07-26-2005, Boston Globe

 

  • "Let's let the states deal with it through a democratic process, rather than have a judiciary make a pronouncement of one size fits all."''
    • Governor Mitt Romney

 

  • "…each state should be able to make its own decision, and allow those states that are strongly pro-life to make laws that fulfill the will of their own citizens." –
    • Governor Mitt Romney, Interview with Hugh Hewitt (July 2005)

 

 

Beliefs About Governor Mitt Romney on the topic of Abortion

 

Governor Mitt Romney has the best abortion stance.

Reasons to agree:

  1. When it comes to abortion, Mitt Romney thinks the people should choose not the courts . And he is right.
  2. Romney respects the rights of states to choose differently than he does. Or in other words he doesn't try and impose his own will on those who disagree with him. This is good.

Reasons to disagree

  1. Some other people have been more consistent when it comes to abortion, and we need consistency out of someone when deciding to let them affect the abortion debate.
  2. Those on the far right might not like that he support abortion except in cases of rape, incest, and when the life of a mother is threatened.
  3. Those on the left are very afraid that Roe vs. Wade will be over turned. Mitt Romney has been calling for this longer than any other 2008 presidential candidate.
  4. Romney has said that his views on abortion have "evolved" and "changed" since 2002 such that he now considers himself a "pro-life governor" who wishes "the laws of our nation could reflect that view." Some people do not think someone in their 40's or 50's can change their mind on Abortion. They see his change as being two faced or opportunistic.
  5. Governor Mitt Romney is personally pro-life , which is good.

 

Governor Mitt Romney is "personally pro-life" which is good.

Reasons to agree:

  1. "It is very conceivable that scientific advances will allow an embryo to be grown for a substantial period of time outside the uterus. To say that it is not life at one month or two months or four months or full term, just because it has never been in a uterus, would be absurd." - Governor Mitt Romney
  2. Romney has identified himself as a pro-life politician.
  3. He does not support abortion except in cases of rape, incest, and when the life of a mother is threatened.
  4. Romney has been a vocal opponent of the Supreme Court decision in Roe vs Wade, criticizing the "one size fits all" statute created by the ruling. The Governor believes each state should have the right to determine its own abortion laws, voicing support for efforts in states such as South Dakota to regulate abortion within its borders.

 

Reasons to disagree:

  1. Being "personally pro-life" means nothing.

 

Websites that agree:

  1. http://www.americansformitt.com/prolife_perspective.html

Mitt Romney is the only candidate with the credibility to oversee the reversal of Roe vs wade .

Reasons to agree

  1. He respects the rights of states to choose differently than he does. Or in other words he doesn't try and impose his own will on those who disagree with him.

 

Mitt Romney was strategic. He knew he couldn't win the abortion battle in Massachusetts, so he gave in. He chose his battles. You shouldn't choose your battles, you should always fight for the right, even if you loose.

 

Related Issues

Governor Mitt Romney supports stem cell research using surplus embryos but opposes the use of cloning to create new embryos.

 

Governor Mitt Romney's Wikipedia Abortion Write Up

 

In 1994, Romney also said that he was personally opposed to abortion. He also said that he became committed to legalized abortion after the death of a family friend in an illegal abortion made him see "that regardless of one's beliefs about choice, you would hope it would be safe and legal."

 

"Many years ago, I had a dear, close family relative that was very close to me who passed away from an illegal abortion," Romney said in a televised debate opposite Senator Edward Kennedy. "It is since that time my mother and my family have been committed to the belief that we can believe as we want, but we will not force our beliefs on others on that matter. And you will not see me wavering on that." The person Romney was referring to was a teenage girl engaged to marry a member of Romney's extended family. Romney's sister Jane has said that the girl's death changed the family's perspective on the legality of abortion. "With my mom, that was a personal thing because we had a tragedy close to us -- not in our immediate family, but a young girl who actually was engaged and had an illegal abortion and died." "She was a beautiful, talented young gal we all loved. And it pretty much ruined the parents -- their only daughter. You would do anything not to repeat that."

 

Romney has said he has kept his campaign promises. Romney vetoed an emergency contraception bill in July 2005, claiming that allowing it to pass into law would violate his "moratorium" on changes to the abortion laws.

 

 

Prior to his run for governor Romney told a newspaper in Salt Lake City Utah that he did not want to be classified as a "pro-choice" politician.


Abortion Debate

You should always choose life.

 

Links

  1. http://del.icio.us/myclob/abortion%2C
  2. http://sanity.blog-city.com/read/abortion.htm
  3. http://dmoz.org/Society/Issues/Abortion/

 

Related Topics

Roe vs Wade

 

Video of Governor Mitt Romney discussing Abortion.

 

If you go to Google Video and type Mitt Romney, you will find this video:

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4362623183954478320&q=tvshow%3ACharlie_Rose

 

The Governor Mitt Romney interview takes about 20 min. If you just want to watch the part about this topic, go to this portion of the video:

 

Abortion: 15:20 min

Abortion State by state 16:04 min

 

Abortion Debate

  1. * "…each state should be able to make its own decision, and allow those states that are strongly pro-life to make laws that fulfill the will of their own citizens." Governor Mitt Romney, Interview with Hugh Hewitt (July 2005)
  2. Judges, and congressmen have no more insight into life issues than the rest of us.
  3. People on both sides of the abortion debate over simplistic.
  4. Not only are some opinions wrong to have, some conversation topics are wrong to discuss.
  5. Mitt Romney is the most conservative of the viable 08 candidates
  6. Romney is a conservative on abstinence education.
  7. Romney changed his position on abortion .
  8. Full term fetuses have developed a relationship with their mother .
  9. You can't just say abortion is wrong-it is more complicated .
  10. If abortion is wrong, it is wrong in every state.
  11. The federal government cannot say when life begins.
  12. People can vote with their feet if they don't like their states abortion laws.
  13. The USA will never come to a consensus on Abortion.

A little fun: Norway's Moose Population in Trouble for Belching

The poor old Scandinavian moose is now being blamed for climate change, with researchers in Norway claiming that a grown moose can produce 2,100 kilos of methane a year -- equivalent to the CO2 output resulting from a 13,000 kilometer car journey.

Now poor moose are being blamed for global warming.
DPA

Now poor moose are being blamed for global warming.

Norway is concerned that its national animal, the moose, is harming the climate by emitting an estimated 2,100 kilos of carbon dioxide a year through its belching and farting.

Norwegian newspapers, citing research from Norway's technical university, said a motorist would have to drive 13,000 kilometers in a car to emit as much CO2 as a moose does in a year.

Bacteria in a moose's stomach create methane gas which is considered even more destructive to the environment than carbon dioxide gas. Cows pose the same problem (more...).

Norway has some 120,000 moose but an estimated 35,000 are expected to be killed in this year's moose hunting season, which starts on September 25, Norwegian newspaper VG reported.

cro

Governor Mitt Romney and Al Gore

"Republicans should never abandon pro-growth conservative principles in an effort to embrace the ideas of Al Gore. Instead of sweeping mandates, we must use America's power of innovation to develop alternative sources of energy and new technologies that use energy more efficiently."

Governor Romney On Senator Obama's Cuba Succession Policy

"Senator Barack Obama continues to demonstrate through his words that he does not have the strength to confront America's enemies or defend our values. First, Senator Obama said he would make it a priority to meet with Castro in his first year in office. Now, he's proposing that we begin to lift sanctions against the Castro regime. Unilateral concessions to a dictatorial regime are counterproductive, helping to secure a succession of power and repression instead of a transition to freedom. They will only embolden those who cling to power at the expense of the Cuban people. We must not weaken our policy on Cuba until the Castro regime is dismantled, all political prisoners are freed and Cuba transitions to free and fair elections."

Governor Romney On Senator Obama's Cuba Succession Policy

"Senator Barack Obama continues to demonstrate through his words that he does not have the strength to confront America's enemies or defend our values. First, Senator Obama said he would make it a priority to meet with Castro in his first year in office. Now, he's proposing that we begin to lift sanctions against the Castro regime. Unilateral concessions to a dictatorial regime are counterproductive, helping to secure a succession of power and repression instead of a transition to freedom. They will only embolden those who cling to power at the expense of the Cuban people. We must not weaken our policy on Cuba until the Castro regime is dismantled, all political prisoners are freed and Cuba transitions to free and fair elections."

Romney Upswing

Mitt Romney: Putting Conservative Principles to Work in Health Care

Mitt Romney: Putting Conservative Principles to Work in Health Care
By Jim Talent
Tuesday, August 21, 2007

Each candidate in the 2008 Presidential race will undoubtedly offer a health care plan. Those plans will include initiatives ranging from a single payer system, to employer mandates, to tax incentives for the purchase of private health insurance. But only one candidate has actually done something, waded into the issue and emerged with a successful plan that does not resort to one-size-fits-all, government run "Hillary Care." That innovative candidate is former Governor Mitt Romney.

On April 12, 2006, Governor Romney signed into law landmark legislation ensuring that every resident of Massachusetts would have access to affordable, portable, quality private health insurance – without higher taxes, an employer mandate or a government takeover of health care.



Republican presidential hopeful, former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney talks with reporters after speaking at a gathering of potential supporters, Friday, July 27, 2007, in Adel, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

Massachusetts was afflicted with many of the same problems that plague the health care system across the country. There was no easy way to buy affordable insurance except through an employer. Without the employer option, it just was not feasible for many people to buy health insurance. As a result, they had to resort to emergency room care and the taxpayers ended up footing the bill. People choosing their health care provider could not get critical information about the cost or quality of care, and excessive state regulations reduced choices and drove up costs.

When Governor Romney decided to tackle the double-digit annual increases in health insurance costs, the average uninsured resident in Massachusetts had to pay $335 a month for private health insurance, which did not include coverage for prescription drugs and featured a $5,000 deductible. Moreover, the state was spending over $1.3 billion a year on "free care" for the uninsured.

Governor Romney actually got the Democrat-controlled legislature to enact a plan that addressed these problems. He took the time to understand what makes private health insurance markets work and transformed the market in his state from one that was government-controlled to one that allows competition to flourish.

Governor Romney's health care plan featured a number of reforms. First, his plan deregulated the overburdened Massachusetts insurance market to reduce the cost of private insurance, while giving consumers more choice from a broader range of plans. Second, the plan addressed the problems caused by the fact that many people could not get healthcare through their employers and could not afford it on the individual market. Third, he redirected the millions of dollars that were being spent on free emergency room care and used it instead to help those who truly were not able to afford private health insurance.

Finally, Governor Romney recognized that competition is the key to the success of any market – so doing what no one had ever done before, he created a new market where consumers can go to pick the health care plan that suits them best. Called the "Connector," this marketplace is not a new regulatory agency or insurance purchasing pool. It is a place that gives people access to more choices, better information, and lower costs in selecting a private health insurance plan. The Connector also provides a way for individuals to purchase insurance with the same pre-tax advantage given to those buying insurance through their employers. Even better, the Connector gives people the chance to buy private insurance independent of their jobs, so that they don't have to worry about losing their coverage when they change employers.

But Governor Romney's reforms did not stop at reducing the cost of insurance today. He also tackled a number of reforms that will help reduce the rise in health care costs over the long-term. His plan included medical transparency provisions that allow consumers to compare the quality of hospitals and providers, while tracking and recording the costs associated with the care they provide. The reforms also instituted measures to encourage the use of electronic health records, which will reduce medical errors and lower costs.

What's been the result of all these reforms? Although the reforms were signed into law just over a year ago, the changes are dramatic. The same uninsured individual whose choice was formerly limited to a policy with a $335 a month insurance premium with no drug benefits and a $5,000 deductible now can purchase quality private insurance, which includes coverage for prescription drugs, office and emergency room visits, and a $2,000 deductible, for $175 per month. Between July 1, 2006 and May 1, 2007, nearly 125,000 previously uninsured residents of Massachusetts got health insurance coverage.

Taxpayer-funded "free care" is falling at double-digit rates, because the Romney reforms no longer allow people to let others pay for their health care if they can afford their own health insurance. Those who previously couldn't afford health insurance now have the help they need to get access to affordable, quality, portable private coverage. And, as he promised, Governor Romney did all this without raising taxes and without a government take-over of health care.

All of Governor Romney's reforms are consistent with the goal of making private health insurance more available, flexible, and affordable. That is why many conservative organizations have hailed Governor Romney's health care reforms. The Heritage Foundation called it "one of the most promising strategies out there." Massachusetts Citizens For Limited Taxation said that Romney's plan was a responsible solution to America's health care challenges. And the Ethan Allen Institute praised Governor Romney's plan because of its focus on personal responsibility and choice.

The bipartisanship, innovation, conservative statesmanship and creativity he exhibited confirms my view that he is the kind of leader this nation needs.

Former Senator Jim Talent (R-MO) is Chairman of the Romney for President Domestic Policy Task Force.

Be the first to read Jim Talent's column.
Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.
Sign up today

Mitt Romney's Record on Economic Issues

Mitt Romney's Record on Economic Issues

Club for Growth Releases Fifth Presidential White Paper
Romney's Record: Promise and Puzzlement

Washington - Today, the Club for Growth released its presidential white paper on Republican presidential candidate Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (see PDF or HTML). The fifth in a series of white papers on the pro-growth records of presidential candidates, the attached report provides an extensive summary of Mitt Romney's economic record from his unsuccessful run for the U.S. Senate to his single term as governor of Massachusetts.


"Governor Romney's economic record contains a mixture of pro-growth accomplishments and some troublesome positions that beg to be explained," said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. "While his record on taxes, spending, and entitlement reform is flawed, it is, on balance, encouraging, especially given the liberal Massachusetts Legislature. His record on trade, school choice, regulations and tort reform all indicate a strong respect for the power of market solutions. At the same time, Governor Romney's history is marked by statements at odds with his gubernatorial record and his campaign rhetoric."

Romney's strident opposition to the flat tax; his refusal to endorse the Bush tax cuts in 2003; his support for various minor tax hikes; and his once-radically bad views on campaign finance reform all cast some doubts on the extent and durability of his commitment to limited-government, pro-growth policies. His landmark steps in the healthcare arena also exhibit a mixture of desirable pro-free market efforts combined with a regrettable willingness to accept, if not embrace, a massive new regulatory regime.

"While Governor Romney still needs to explain some of his past positions," Mr. Toomey continued, "given his overall record as governor and the strong pro-growth positions he has taken on the campaign trail, we are reasonably optimistic that, as President, Mitt Romney would generally advocate a pro-growth agenda."





The Romney Record: Promise and Puzzlement


Taxes

The Club for Growth is committed to lower taxes-especially lower tax rates- across the board. Lower taxes on work, savings, and investments lead to greater levels of these activities, thus encouraging greater economic growth.

During his 2002 campaign for governor, Mitt Romney pledged to balance the budget without raising taxes and touted his fulfillment of that pledge throughout his term. While it is true that Governor Romney did not impose any broad-based tax hikes despite pressure from liberal special interests and an inherited budget deficit, he imposed a slew of fee hikes and tax "loophole" closures, together with spending cuts, in order to eliminate the budget gap.

The largest of these was $259 million worth of fee hikes in FY 2004, the bulk of which came from higher Registry of Deeds fees[1 ]. Smaller fee hikes, including higher charges for boaters and golfers, were imposed in FY 2003[2] and FY 2005 [3]. Romney also sought $128 million worth of so-called tax loophole closures for FY 2004[ 4]; $70 million for FY 2005[5]; and $170 million for FY 2006, which were later reduced to $85 million due to backlash from business leaders [6].

That said, Governor Romney's single term contained some solid efforts to promote pro-growth tax policy. In May of 2004, Mitt Romney proposed cutting the state's income-tax rate from 5.3% to 5.0% -- a measure Massachusetts voters had approved in a 2000 referendum, but was blocked by the State Legislature in 2002. The proposed tax cut would have provided $675 million in relief over a year and a half[7]. When the Massachusetts Legislature refused to budge, Romney proposed the same tax cut in 2005 [8] and again in 2006 with no success[ 9].

Romney was more successful when he took on the State Legislature for imposing a retroactive tax on capital gains earnings. After a bloody fight, Romney succeeded in passing a bill preventing the capital gains tax from being applied retroactively, resulting in a rebate of $275 million for capital gains taxes collected in 2002[10]. Governor Romney also signed legislation that provided property tax relief to seniors [11] and legislation establishing a two-day tax-free shopping holiday in 2005.[ 12]

Governor Romney's history on tax policy is scattered with inconsistencies. As a candidate for governor, Romney refused to sign an anti-tax pledge distributed by the local Citizens for Limited Taxation. He opposed Ballot Question 1 to eliminate the state income tax and proposed an auto excise tax on SUVs and a greenfields tax on the development of ocean space.[13] In 2003, the Governor refused to endorse the Bush tax cuts, earning the praise of Massachusetts liberal congressman Barney Frank[14], and was even open to a federal gas tax hike[ 15]. His strident opposition to the flat tax is most curious and difficult to explain since Romney wasn't a political candidate at the time. In 1996, he ran a series of newspaper ads in Boston, New Hampshire, and Iowa denouncing the 17% flat tax proposed by then presidential candidate Steve Forbes as a "tax cut for fat cats".[16] Even today, Romney continues to oppose the flat tax with harsh language, calling the tax "unfair." [17]

Overall, Romney's record on tax policy is mixed. His record is marred by questionable statements and positions, and his fee hikes and "loophole" closures are troubling. However, his support for broad-based tax cuts in liberal Massachusetts together with his enthusiastic embrace of the Bush tax cuts on the campaign trail offers hope that Governor Romney's previous ambivalence on tax policy is more a function of Massachusetts politics than his core beliefs.

 

Spending

The Club for Growth is committed to reducing government spending. Less spending enhances economic growth by enabling lower taxes and diminishing the economically inefficient political allocation of resources.

Governor Romney's record on spending must be considered within the liberal political context in which he governed. The Massachusetts Legislature was (and continues to be) dominated by Democrats more interested in raising taxes than cutting government programs. Throughout his tenure, Romney's proposed cuts were met with opposition while the vast majority of his vetoes were relegated to the graveyard of overrides.

On balance, his record comes out more positive than negative, especially when one considers that average spending increased only 2.22% over his four years, well below the population plus inflation benchmark of nearly 3%.[18]

Governor Romney receives credit for actual spending in FY 2003, even though he entered office halfway into the fiscal year, because of the tremendous spending cuts he forced down the Legislature's throat in January of 2003. Facing a $650 million deficit he inherited from the previous administration, Romney convinced the unfriendly State Legislature to grant him unilateral power to make budget cuts and unveiled $343 million in cuts to cities, healthcare, and state agencies.[19] This fiscal discipline continued in 2004, in which Romney continued to slash "nearly every part of state government" to close a $3 billion deficit.[20]

At the same time, Governor Romney clearly loosened the purse strings for FY 2006 and in his proposed budget for FY 2007 (final spending for FY 2007 is not yet available, and is partly the responsibility of Romney's successor, Governor Deval Patrick). With surpluses flowing into the state coffers, the Romney administration sought to undo some of the success it had achieved during the initial lean years.[21] The result was a budget proposal for 2007 that was a whopping 10.12% larger than the preceding fiscal year.[22]

To his credit, Romney attempted to cut down on government spending by streamlining many duplicative and wasteful elements of Beacon Hill. Some of his more ambitious proposals were rejected by his über-liberal Legislature. These include: his plans to overhaul the wasteful Boston Municipal Court and close underused courthouses; merge the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority with the Highway Department; decentralize management of the University of Massachusetts; streamline the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission; and phase out the obsolete Worcester State Hospital where employees outnumber patients nearly 3 to 1.[23]

Governor Romney successfully consolidated the social service and public health bureaucracy and restructured the Metropolitan District Commission.[24] Romney even eliminated half of the executive branch's press positions, saving $1.2 million.[ 25] He also used his emergency fiscal powers to make $425 million worth of cuts in 2006, taking particular aim at local earmarks, instead of allowing the Legislature to dip into the state's $1.2 billion rainy day fund.[26] While there is no question that Governor Romney's initial fiscal discipline slacked off in the second half of his term, on balance, he imposed some much-needed fiscal discipline on a very liberal Massachusetts Legislature.

 

Free Trade

Free trade is a vital policy for maximizing economic growth. In recent decades, America's commitment to expanding trade has resulted in lower costs for consumers, job growth, and higher levels of productivity and innovation.

Although Mitt Romney's practical record on trade is scant, his rhetoric has been supportive, demonstrating an understanding of the crucial relationship between economic growth and free trade. At a speech before top technology executives in 2005, Romney encouraged U.S. companies to sell their products abroad, rather than turning toward protectionism: "We must move ahead in technology and patents. I don't like losing any jobs but we'll see new opportunities created selling products there. We'll have a net increase in economic activity, just as we did with free trade. It's tempting to want to protect our markets and stay closed. But at some point it all comes crashing down and you're hopelessly left behind. Then you are Russia."[27]

Romney was also a supporter of CAFTA, saying, "It does make me chuckle, when you see Congress struggling about whether we should open our trade with Central America. When Asia is looming off the horizon, we're worried about El Salvador and Guatemala?"[28]

 

Entitlement Reform

America's major middle-class entitlement programs are already insolvent. The Club for Growth supports entitlement reforms that enable personal ownership of retirement and healthcare programs, benefit from market returns, and diminish dependency on government.

As governor, Romney pushed for important changes to Massachusetts expansive welfare system. Although federal welfare reform passed in 1995, Massachusetts was woefully behind, relying on a waiver to bypass many of the legislation's important requirements. Romney fought for legislation that would bring Massachusetts' welfare system up to date with federal standards by increasing the number of hours each week recipients must work and establishing a five-year limit for receiving benefits.[29] Much to his credit and to the dismay of many Massachusetts liberals, Romney successfully forced Medicaid recipients to make co-payments for some services[30] and successfully pushed for legislative action forcing new state workers to contribute 25% of their health insurance costs, up from 15%.[31] Governor Romney also deserves praise for proposing to revolutionize the Massachusetts state pension system by moving it from a defined benefit system to a defined contribution system.[32]

Regarding Social Security, Romney's record is scarce. Romney has ruled out the option of raising Social Security taxes, embraced the idea of reducing the growth rate of future benefits, and supports personal accounts, but unfortunately, has not embraced a comprehensive reform plan as of yet.[33]

But one cannot talk about Romney's record on entitlement reform without considering the universal healthcare plan Governor Romney helped craft in Massachusetts. The bill that Governor Romney signed with a grinning Ted Kennedy in the background on April 12, 2006,[34] has been the victim of much scorn from many economic conservatives. Some of those criticisms are valid. However, Romney also deserves credit for trying to move a terrible system towards free-market improvements.

It is important to state that many of the problems that plague our healthcare system are rooted in federal law, leaving governors with their hands tied. The federal tax code severely impedes individual ownership of health insurance, and federal legislation requires hospitals to treat all patients regardless of their ability to pay, effectively creating a universal healthcare mandate and forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for people who can afford, but refuse to buy, insurance.

Governor Romney didn't have the option of reforming federal law, and was forced to contend with a liberal Legislature that rejected many of his positive reforms. He was also facing a Bush administration threat to cut off $385 million per year in federal Medicaid funds unless the state reduced the number of uninsured people.[35] Given these limitations, Governor Romney deserves credit for proposing (and to a lesser extent, enacting) a plan that encourages individually-owned health insurance and circumvents some of the inequities carved into the federal tax code.

In order to bypass this inequity, Romney created a device known as the "Connector" that serves as a government-sponsored clearinghouse/regulator for private healthcare plans. Ideally, the role of the "Connector" would be played by the private sector and would not include a regulatory function. Nevertheless, the Massachusetts "Connector" does dramatically facilitate individually-owned health insurance plans by enabling individuals to purchase health insurance with pre-tax dollars and choose from a number of competing private plans.[36]

Governor Romney also deserves credit for redirecting money earmarked for hospitals, as part of the uncompensated care program, to individuals directly in the form of a subsidized premium assistance program. While subsidies for individual purchases are overly generous (people earning up to 300% of the federal poverty level qualify), in contrast to subsidizing hospitals, they encourage individual ownership of private health insurance, broaden the private health insurance pool, distribute risk over a wider spectrum, and may lower overall costs.[37]

To be sure, the Massachusetts plan's individual mandate to purchase healthcare insurance rankles libertarian instincts and necessitates a government-defined standard for compliance-and Romney should be taken to task for this. A system of incentives for purchasing insurance together with penalties for consuming healthcare services without coverage would no doubt be a major improvement over the Massachusetts government-imposed mandate. Romney's original proposal offered individuals the option of forgoing insurance and posting a bond in an interest-bearing account, but the Legislature made sure that option never saw the light of day.[38]

Governor Romney tried to deregulate the overregulated healthcare insurance coverage. Many of his efforts were rebuffed by the Legislature, but he did make some progress. Thanks to Governor Romney, HMOs can now offer high deductible plans tied to health savings accounts; Massachusetts set a three-year moratorium on new benefit mandates; and individuals aged 19-26 have the option of enrolling in low-cost plans with dollar-limited annual benefits.[39]

One of the most objectionable elements of the plan in principle-the employer mandate that requires businesses with 11 or more full-time employees to provide health insurance-was inserted by the Legislature and is easily circumvented.[40] Governor Romney vetoed this provision, but the veto was quickly overridden.[ 41]

To be sure, Commonwealth Care is a far cry from free-market healthcare. Besides the individual and employer mandates, the program expands Medicaid,[42] does not deregulate enough, and will likely cost more than the current system[ 43], which despite all its flaws, does, after all, already provide universal healthcare on demand. Most of the blame for the deficiencies in the Massachusetts plan lies with the liberal Legislature which, absent the resistance of Governor Romney, almost certainly would have enacted a major tax increase while moving healthcare reform in the worst possible direction. Nevertheless, given its massively regulatory nature and likely high cost, the Massachusetts healthcare plan is not a model upon which a national plan should be built.

 

Regulation

Excessive government regulation stymies individual and business innovation necessary for strong economic expansion. The Club for Growth supports less and more sensible government regulation as a critical step toward increasing freedom and growth in the marketplace.

Mitt Romney's record on regulation is generally impressive. On the campaign trail, he has supported drilling in ANWR[44 ] and opposed the burdensome regulations imposed by Sarbanes-Oxley[45]. As governor, he often clashed with the knee-jerk anti-business Legislature over his attempts to ease Massachusetts' regulatory burdens. Though some of his largest undertakings were ultimately crushed by liberal opposition, Governor Romney deserves praise for attempting to change the relationship between government and private enterprise for the better. These efforts include:

  • Vetoed an increase in the minimum wage from $6.75 to $8.00, proposing a 25-cent increase as a compromise, and arguing that "there's no question raising the minimum wage excessively causes a loss of jobs"[46]
  • Pushed to revamp the Pacheco Law, a union-backed measure that makes it nearly impossible to privatize or outsource state services[47]
  • Aggressively pushed to deregulate Massachusetts' "Soviet-style" auto insurance industry. Massachusetts is the only state in which the government mandates maximum insurance rates and requires insurers to accept every applicant[48]
  • Called for the privatization of the University of Massachusetts medical school [ 49]
  • Proposed measures to eliminate civil service protection for all municipal workers except police and firefighters and exempt low-cost public construction jobs from the state's wage law [50]
  • Proposed easing decades-old state regulations on wetlands [51]
  • Proposed easing pricing regulations on Massachusetts retailers [ 52]
  • Signed a bill streamlining the state's cumbersome permitting process for new businesses [53]
  • Eased regulations for brownfield development [54]
  • Vetoed a bill limiting the ability of out-of-state wineries to ship directly to Massachusetts consumers, calling the legislation "anti-consumer" [55]

Governor Romney's regulatory record contains some flaws. Despite vetoing the Legislature's minimum wage increase, the Governor is on record supporting indexing the minimum wage to inflation.[56] Romney also signed into law a measure banning smoking in the workplace including bars and restaurants (with exemptions for some private clubs)[57]; and implemented "comprehensive ocean zoning reform" that imposed new regulations on ocean front development. [58]

On balance, Romney's anti-regulation efforts reflect an intuitive appreciation for the free market and its important role in promoting economic growth. While many of his proposals were rejected by the State Legislature, he demonstrated strong support for private enterprise in a state where regulation is a way of life.

 

School Choice

The Club for Growth supports broad school choice, including charter schools, voucher programs, and tax credits that create a competitive education market including public, private, religious, and non-religious schools. More competition in education can only lead to higher quality and lower costs.

Mitt Romney is on record supporting charter schools, school vouchers, and home schooling. As governor, Romney focused on charter school expansion rather than implementing a voucher program. He pushed to eliminate the state-mandated cap on the number of charter schools[59] and successfully vetoed a moratorium on the opening of new charter schools, passed by the Massachusetts Legislature in 2004. [60] Although comprehensive school choice clearly is the solution to much of what plagues primary and secondary education, it is understandable that Governor Romney chose to spend his political capital on more attainable charter school expansion given the political opposition to empowering poor children in Massachusetts.

During his 1994 Senate race, he advocated abolishing the Department of Education[61], but has since moved away from that admirable position, saying in the FOX News Republican presidential debate that he supports No Child Left Behind and has seen as a governor that "the Department of Education can actually make a difference."[62]

 

Political Free Speech

Maximizing prosperity requires sound government policies. When the government strays from these policies, citizens must be free to exercise their constitutional rights to petition and criticize those policies and the politicians responsible for them.

Mitt Romney's position on political free speech has undergone a radical evolution. During his 1994 Senate race against Ted Kennedy, Romney took an outrageous position on campaign finance reform that put him to the left of the current McCain-Feingold legislation, arguing for campaign spending limits-unconstitutional even under Buckley v. Valeo-and the abolition of PACs:

"I personally believe that when campaigns spend the kind of money they're now spending...and to get that kind of money you've gotta cozy up as an incumbent to all of the special-interest groups who can go out and raise money for you from their members, and that kind of relationship has an influence over the way you're going to vote...And for that reason I would like to have campaign spending limits and to say we're not going to spend more than this in certain campaigns...I also would abolish PACS. You probably have one. I don't like them. I don't like the influence of money-whether it's business, labor, or any other group. I do not like that kind of influence..."[63]

In his 2002 gubernatorial campaign, Romney proposed a radical new campaign finance system, in which privately-funded campaigns would be taxed 10% in order to fund publicly-funded campaigns as part of Massachusetts' Clean Election Law in order to "spare taxpayers the burden of shouldering the entire expense of this program."[64] In 2003, he allowed a repeal of the Clean Elections Law to stand. [65]

As a presidential candidate, Mitt Romney has pivoted drastically, abandoning his old anti-First Amendment stance and taking the harshest position on McCain-Feingold of all the candidates. He has called repeatedly for the legislation's repeal,[66] and even labeled the bill "one of the worst things in my lifetime." [67] Now Romney is advocating "reforms that promote transparency and disclosure, preserve grassroots activism and protect the ability to criticize or endorse current officeholders and candidates."[68] While we welcome this change of heart, we hope it is inspired by greater appreciation for the First Amendment rather than by the political dynamics of the presidential primary.

 

Tort Reform

The American economy suffers from excessive litigation which increases the cost of doing business and slows economic growth. The Club for Growth supports major reforms to our tort system to restore a more just and less costly balance in tort litigation.

From his 1994 Senate race,[69] to his gubernatorial campaign in 2002, and throughout his four years as governor, Romney was a strong proponent of tort reform. As governor, he supported capping personal injury claims in automobile-related cases[70] and advocated for overhauling Massachusetts' exorbitant medical malpractice system. Massachusetts is notorious for having some of the highest malpractice insurance rates in the country, driving doctors in key specialties out of the state.[71]

During his gubernatorial campaign, Mitt Romney supported capping punitive damages to replace the unlimited status quo.[72] In 2003, Romney also supported a bill to cap noneconomic awards at $500,000, arguing at a rally organized by the Massachusetts Medical Society, "If we have in place policies which drive physicians away, which drive costs spiraling out of control, we can't attract jobs, we can't have a better future for our kids and the families that want to live here. We need reform now."[73] In May of 2006, the Romney administration issued a specific tort reform proposal, calling for:

  • Closing loopholes in the $500,000 cap on non-economic damages which allowed lawyers to win excessive damages
  • Reducing lawsuits by allowing doctors to disclose medical errors without fear of admissibility in court
  • Increasing the number of claims resolved prior to trial
  • Tightening the state's tribunal system to ensure that only meritorious malpractice lawsuits go to trial
  • Reduces lawyers' fees from 25% for verdicts over $500,000 to 15% for verdicts over $600,000
  • Reducing pre-judgment interest to the one-year Treasury rate[74]

On the campaign trail, Romney has taken his impressive record to the national level, insisting on badly needed nationwide tort reform.[75]

 

Summation

As Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney's record on economic issues was generally good. He demonstrated a willingness to take on his Legislature and deserves credit for the many pro-growth measures he advocated and the modest reforms he was able to achieve. While his record on taxes, spending and entitlement reform is flawed, it is, on balance, encouraging, especially given the liberal Massachusetts Legislature. His record on trade, school choice, regulations, and tort reform all indicate a strong respect for the power of market solutions.

At the same time, Governor Romney's history is marked by statements at odds with his gubernatorial record and his campaign rhetoric. His strident opposition to the flat tax; his refusal to endorse the Bush tax cuts in 2003; his support for various minor tax hikes; and his once-radically bad views on campaign finance reform all cast some doubts on the extent and durability of his commitment to limited-government, pro-growth policies. His landmark steps in the health care arena also exhibit a mixture of desirable pro-free market efforts combined with a regrettable willingness to accept, if not embrace, a massive new regulatory regime. Nevertheless, given his outstanding private sector entrepreneurial experience; the strong pro-growth positions he has taken on the campaign trail; his overall record as governor; and the fact that the U.S. Congress will not be as liberal as the Massachusetts Legislature, we are reasonably optimistic that, as President, Mitt Romney would generally advocate a pro-growth agenda.

 

Footnotes

[1]Massachusetts Executive Office of Administration and Finance, internal documents
[2]Boston Herald, 01/30/03
[3]Knight Ridder Tribune Business News, 01/29/04
[4]Knight Ridder Tribune Business News, 02/27/03
[5]Knight Ridder Tribune Business News, 01/29/04
[6]Boston Globe, 03/26/05
[7]Boston Globe, 05/20/04
[8]The Providence Journal, 05/18/05
[9]Boston Globe, 07/01/06
[10]Knight Ridder Tribune Business News, 12/02/05 & Associated Press, 12,05/05
[11]Press Release, Mitt Romney, 11/20/05
[12]Press Release, Mitt Romney, 07/22/05
[13]Boston Herald, 10/27/02
[14]Boston Globe, 04/11/03
[15]Boston Herald, 02/08/07
[16]Hotline On Call, 04/28/07
[17]Des Moines Register, 04/05/07
[18]Bureau of Labor Statistics & U.S. Census Bureau
[19]Boston Globe, 01/30/03
[20]Telegram & Gazette, 02/27/03
[21]Telegram & Gazette, 01/14/06
[22]Executive Office of Administration and Finance
[23]Telegram & Gazette, 08/03/03
[24]Telegram & Gazette, 08/03/03
[25]Associated Press, 01/28/03
[26]Boston Globe, 11/23/06
[27]CRN.com, 11/16/05, Source
[28]Associated Press, 11/16/05
[29]Boston Globe, 07/09/05
[30]The Patriot Ledger, 07/05/03
[31]Boston Globe, 06/20/03
[32]Boston Globe, 03/09/03
[33]Mitt Romney, Club for Growth Winter Conference, 03/29/07 & St. Petersburg Times, 08/07/07
[34]The Daily Free Press, 04/13/06, Source
[35]International Herald Tribune, 04/06/06
[36]Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder, No. 1953, 07/18/06
[37]Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder, No. 1953, 07/18/06
[38]Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder, No. 1953, 07/18/06 & Boston Globe, 11/13/05
[39]Heritage Foundation, WebMemo, No. 1414, 04/04/07
[40]Heritage Foundation, WebMemo No. 1045, 04/20/06
[41]Business Insurance, 05/08/06, Vol. 40, Iss. 19
[42]Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder, No. 1953, 07/18/06 & Boston Globe, 11/10/05
[43]Health Affairs, "The Third Wave of Massachusetts Health Care Access Reform," 09/14/06 & Cato Policy Analysis No. 595, 06/28/07
[44]Boston Globe, 12/13/05
[45]Mitt Romney, Club for Growth Winter Conference, 03/29/07
[46]Telegram & Gazette, 08/01/06
[47]Boston Globe, 02/26/03
[48]The Sun, 06/02/05
[49]Telegram & Gazette, 02/27/03
[50]Boston Herald, 01/31/03
[51]Telegram & Gazette, 09/05/04
[52]Knight Ridder Tribune Business News, 02/27/03
[53]The Berkshire Eagle, 08/04/06
[54]Boston Globe, 09/12/03
[55]Press Release, Mitt Romney, 11/21/05 & Telegram & Gazette, 11/22/05
[56]The Patriot Ledger, 11/02/02
[57]Press Release, Mitt Romney, 06/18/04 & The Patriot Ledger, 06/11/04
[58]US Fed News Service, 03/18/05
[59]Telegram & Gazette, 01/24/04
[60]Boston Globe, 06/26/04 & Boston Globe, 07/21/04
[61]Boston Globe, 10/12/94
[62]Fox News Channel, Republican presidential debate, 05/15/07
[63]C-SPAN2, 10/17/94, Source
[64]The Patriot Ledger, 10/15/02 & Telegram & Gazette, 06/30/03
[65]Telegram & Gazette, 06/30/03
[66]Press Release, Romney for President, 03/02/07
[67]The Hill, 02/08/07
[68]Press Release, Romney for President, 03/02/07
[69]Boston Globe, 07/01/94
[70]The Sun, 06/02/05
[71]Boston Globe, 11/13/03
[72]Boston Globe, 10/02/02
[73]Boston Globe, 04/09/03
[74]Press Release, Mitt Romney, 05/23/06
[75]Mitt Romney, Detroit Economic Club, 02/07/07