You know it; I know it; probably a stranded Martian hiding under a rock in Somalia knows it: Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts healthcare reforms were the intellectual underpinning for the policy Republicans now deride as “Obamacare.” It’s been the albatross around the former governor’s neck ever since he entered the 2012 race, with even President Obama acknowledging its origins.
The GOP frontrunner has put up a valiant effort to claim there are major differences. That hasn’t always prompted a happy reaction from the less partisan advisers who helped him craft the law he’s now running away from.
Foremost among that group of disgruntled wonks is MIT professor Jonathan Gruber. He’s come out in the past saying it’s “sad” that Romney is running from his signature achievement, but now he’s turned things up to eleven.
In an interview with Capital New York, a “frustrated” Gruber vents about the possibility of the bill’s key component – the so-called individual mandate – being ripped out of it by the Supreme Court.
The interview is worth reading in full, but here’s the key passage regarding Romney:
He credited Mitt Romney for not totally disavowing the Massachusetts bill during his presidential campaign, but said Romney’s attempt to distinguish between Obama’s bill and his own is disingenuous.
“The problem is there is no way to say that,” Gruber said. “Because they’re the same fucking bill. He just can’t have his cake and eat it too. Basically, you know, it’s the same bill. He can try to draw distinctions and stuff, but he’s just lying.”
Gruber is a passionate defender of the bill he helped create, even going to the extent of writing a graphic novel to help dispel the misconceptions that sprang up even before Sarah Palin uttered the fateful words, “death panel.” In the interview he doubts the good intentions of those trying to dismantle the bill, saying, “Look, if this succeeds, then Obama becomes F.D.R.” So if it does wind up being gutted it will be “on purely political grounds.”
