New York Times: Big Last-Minute Donations Fuel Pro-Romney Super PAC

New York Times: Big Last-Minute Donations Fuel Pro-Romney Super PAC

By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE

October 25, 2012

New York Times: Big Last-Minute Donations Fuel Pro-Romney Super PAC

New York Times: Big Last-Minute Donations Fuel Pro-Romney Super PAC

By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE

October 25, 2012

New York Times: Big Last-Minute Donations Fuel Pro-Romney Super PAC

New York Times: Big Last-Minute Donations Fuel Pro-Romney Super PAC

By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE

October 25, 2012

RESEARCH MEMO: Results Of Dial Group Session In Aurora, CO.

M E M O R A N D U M

TO:                  Priorities USA Action

FROM:            Geoff Garin, Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group

DATE:             Debate Night, October 3, 2012

RE:                  Results Of Dial Group Session In Aurora, CO.

In our Aurora, Colorado dial group session with the kinds of up-for-grabs voters whom Mitt Romney must win to overcome his deficits in swing states, President Obama reinforced his advantages on key qualities, and wavering Obama supporters (who were willing to give Romney a second look) largely were unimpressed by what Governor Romney had to say.

The large majority of panelists in the Aurora session were weak Democrats and independents who voted for Obama in 2008 but who remain open to switching in the upcoming election.

Six in 10 respondents gave President Obama favorable ratings for his overall performance in the debate, compared with just one in seven who did so for Romney.

The starkest difference between the two candidates was in their likeability.  Eight in 10 respondents gave President Obama high marks for coming across as likeable and down to earth, while very few felt that way about Governor Romney.  The President came out with a distinct advantage over Romney on the important trait, “caring about people,” and respondents were much more likely to give Obama credit for being honest and truthful in discussing the issues.

Compared with the beginning of the session, there was a doubling in the number of respondents who said that Obama has good ideas for improving the economy.  While Romney also improved on this dimension, 63% of respondents said at the end that Obama expressed good ideas for improving the economy, compared with 27% who said the same about Romney in the debate.

The discussion of health care also played distinctly to Obama’s advantage.  Many respondents came into the room equivocal about which candidate would be better on health care, but those voters split significantly in Obama’s favor after hearing both candidates on the issues.  Romney lost ground when he talked about repealing ObamaCare.

Romney did gain ground on the President on the issue of taxes, and he largely negated the advantage Obama had on the issue when respondents first walked into the room.

In the moment-to-moment dialing, President Obama’s high points were when he talked about outsourcing and tax breaks for shipping jobs overseas, the need for a balanced approach to dealing with the deficit, and clean energy.

Romney’s high points were fewer, but he scored best whenever he spoke about making jobs the number-one priority.

Respondents who came into the room open to Romney as an alternative to Obama felt disappointed in Romney’s lack of specifics.  But Romney did benefit from low expectations among this group, and several said that Romney did not seem as bad as they thought he might be.  For these key swing voters, whom Obama must hold and

Romney must win, the first debate did not change much, but it also did not settle much.  Obama continues to have the advantage with them, but the deal still is not sealed.

Voters Believe Romney Would Favor the Rich At Expense of Middle Class

Even before the release this week of Mitt Romney’s comments dismissing 47% of Americans as dependent and lacking in personal responsibility, voters already understood that Romney is badly out of touch with the reality of average people’s lives and that he can’t be trusted to look out for the interests of middle class Americans who work hard and play by the rules.

RESEARCH MEMO: Polling Ryan

TO:      Interested Parties

FR:      Priorities USA Action (Based on Polling Conducted by Garin-Hart-Yang Research and Global Strategy Group)

RE:      Memo: Polling Ryan

Since Priorities USA Action began in mid-2011, we have focused extensive time on public opinion research surrounding the House Republican Budget authored by Representative Paul Ryan. Our research came to two main conclusions:

1. The Ryan Budget is politically toxic document overall.  The specific proposals it contains – particularly on tax policy, education and Medicare – left voters viscerally angry.

2. Our challenge would be to convince voters that a politician could support it.

In focus groups and polling conducted with swing voters in battleground states in 2011 and 2012, many voters were deeply concerned – in many cases shocked – with the priorities in Ryan’s budget. The response to the plan was virtually unanimous strong opposition. However, when told that Romney supported the Ryan plan, many voters simply did not believe it. The underlying assumption was clear: no frontrunner for a major party’s Presidential nomination could support such an extreme proposal.

Therefore, a key strategic challenge for Democrats was to convince voters that Romney was the kind of candidate who could actually support a proposal that cut and eliminated programs for the poor and middle class to finance tax cuts for the very wealthiest.

That is why we started by educating voters about Mitt Romney’s business record.  It provided illustrations of a corporate CEO who put profit ahead of the concerns of middle class workers, time after time.  Provided with this information on Romney’s business record, voters in focus groups were much more open to the fact that Romney supports the policies in the Ryan Budget that cut education and Medicare for the middle class in order to finance tax cuts for the wealthy.  One Colorado swing voter made it clear that they now realized that Romney – in his private sector experience and his policies as President – is about “the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.”

By choosing Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney actually helped to solve one of the key strategic challenges we had in helping voters to understand that, in fact, Romney does support the kind of policies embedded in the Ryan budget. 

The toxic nature of the Ryan Budget simply can’t be overstated. In Priorities USA Action polling in 2011 and 2012, descriptions of the Ryan Budget were consistently and decisively the most effective messages against Romney and Republicans – better than dozens of others tested. Descriptions of the Ryan plan’s impact on education, taxes, Medicare, job training and high-tech research consistently raise “major doubts” about Romney in over 55 percent of likely voters. Among independent and swing voters, the concerns are even greater.

Mostly overlooked among the pundit class is that Ryan’s Medicare proposal is only one driver of the plan’s unpopularity. The Ryan plan's deep cuts to early childhood education are ‘extremely concerning’ for 62% of voters. Cuts to Pell Grants for college students are extremely concerning to 57% of voters. The plan’s shift in the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class is extremely concerning to 62%. Cuts to job training, nursing home care, scientific research and children’s health care all raise similar concerns for voters. Other individual items with the Ryan Budget – such as cuts to higher education, tax cuts for corporations, and increasing health care costs for seniors – were consistently labeled as “extremely concerning” by about half of voters. 

Finally, Paul Ryan’s insistence on tax cuts for the very wealthiest Americans completely undermines the plan’s stated focus on reducing deficits. In focus groups, voters did not take seriously a supposed deficit reduction plan that also included significant new tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. 

It is for all of these reasons that our very first ad of the cycle “Pages,” which ran in South Carolina in May of 2011, was focused on tying Mitt Romney to the Ryan budget. Up until that point, Romney had attempted to dodge questions on the Ryan plan.

Because of the significant spending advantage for Romney provided by Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers and a deeply polarized electorate, this election will stay close until the very end.

Over the next months, Priorities USA Action will be focused on defining the choice in this election for voters in key battleground states. The selection of Paul Ryan makes that task much clearer.

MEMO: Hispanic Media Campaign Has Made A Real Impact

Memorandum

Date:        July 25, 2012
To:        SEIU and Priorities USA Action
From:        Andrew Myers and Ben Lazarus

Hispanic Media Campaign Has Made A Real Impact

Key Findings:

• Mitt Romney’s favorability ratings are damaged among Hispanic voters in Colorado, Nevada and Florida’s Orlando and Tampa media markets.
• This damage is clearly a result of SEIU and Priorities’ media campaign.

According to the results of our recent tracking polls  in Colorado, Nevada and Florida’s Orlando and Tampa media markets, the SEIU / Priorities Spanish-language independent expenditure campaign targeted at Hispanic voters has made a clear impact on the dynamics of the Presidential contest.  This, despite the fact that the independent expenditure campaign engaged while Romney was rising in other national and state polls after securing the GOP nomination, communicated on Spanish language media, and delivered a well-publicized speech at NALEO.  In each state, President Obama continues to dominate over Mitt Romney among likely Hispanic voters and is performing at or above 2008 exit poll levels; in Colorado he leads by 45-points, 70 to 25 percent; in the Orlando market he leads by 34-points, 64 to 30 percent; in the Tampa market he leads by 33-points, 63 to 30 percent; and in Nevada he leads by 45-points, 69 to 24 percent.

More importantly, these surveys demonstrate that this campaign has had a real effect in framing and discrediting Romney among Hispanic voters, resulting in a clear upward trajectory in Mitt Romney’s negative personal ratings across each of these states.  While the impact is visible overall, it is far more profound among those who get their news about politics in both English and Spanish.  Indeed, the trends are particularly marked among the consumers of Spanish language news, as unfavorable ratings of Romney have spiked in each state among those who report that they get their news on elections in the U.S. from both English and Spanish sources. Moreover, we see a significant uptick in the intensity of Romney’s negatives; his strongly unfavorable ratings have increased by 10-points in Colorado (from 46 to 56 percent), by 19-points in the Orlando market (from 29 to 48 percent), by 9-points in the Tampa market (from 33 to 42 percent) and by 4-points in Nevada (from 42 to 46 percent).  In total, the results of these surveys suggest that Romney’s communications have proven completely ineffective.

As shown in the graph to the right, only about 1-in-5 Hispanic voters in Colorado continue to greet Romney favorably, but his unfavorable ratings have grown by 8-points over the course of the last two months, and today nearly two-thirds of voters have negative personal impressions of him.  The spike in Romney’s unfavorables has been driven almost entirely by the SEIU / Priorities media efforts, and the changes are profound among those who get their election information from both English and Spanish news sources, where Romney’s unfavorable ratings grew by 15-points to 60 percent.

In the Tampa and Orlando DMAs we also see real change in perceptions of Romney.  Romney’s unfavorables have grown in both markets, but the leap in the Tampa market is impressive, as shown in the graph to the left.  In fact, in the Tampa market, it is clear that we are in the midst of a developing trend with Romney’s favorables dropping by 8-points, his neutral impressions growing by 7-points, and his unfavorables increasing by 2-points.  

Across the two Florida markets, Romney is more damaged among those who get their political news from both Spanish and English sources, as shown in the graph to the right, and as a result of SEIU / Priorities’ communications efforts.

Finally in a clear sign of real trouble for Romney, less than a quarter of Nevada Hispanic voters view him favorably today (a 5-point decline since May), and his unfavorable ratings have grown by 5-points over the course of the last two months, with a majority of voters now expressing negative personal impressions of him.  Similar to what we see in Colorado, and as shown in the graph below, the spike in Romney’s unfavorables has been driven almost entirely by those who get their election information from Spanish news sources.

Broadly, these data make it crystal clear that the SEIU / Priorities media campaign has been remarkably successful in communicating to Hispanic voters that Romney is not on the side of working people and does not have their best interests at heart.  In all three surveys voters give Obama a very robust advantage on the perception of which candidate is closest to “being on your side”; in Colorado it is a 41-point edge; a 40-point edge in Nevada; a 35-point edge in the Orlando market and a 30-point edge in the Tampa market.  Obama is also favored broadly on the notion of “protecting Medicare and Social Security”, holding a 42-point advantage in Colorado on this dimension, a 43-point advantage in Nevada, a 34-point advantage in the Orlando market, and a 36-point advantage in the Tampa market.

[1] Myers Research | Strategic Services, LLC designed and administered these telephone surveys conducted by professional, bilingual interviewers in the respondents’ language of choice.  Each survey reached 500 adults, 18 years or older, who are registered to vote, who indicated they consider themselves to be Hispanic, Latino or Spanish speaking Americans, and who indicated that they are almost certain to vote, will probably vote, or the chances are 50-50 that they will vote in the November 2012 election for President. 85 percent of interviews were conducted on landlines and 15 percent of interviews were conducted on cell phones.  The Colorado and Florida surveys were conducted July 11-17, 2012, and the Nevada survey was conducted July 11-18, 2012. The margin of error associated with these data at a 95 in 100 percent confidence level is +/- 4.4 percent.  The margin of error for subgroups is greater and varies.

MEMO: Mitt Romney’s Central Qualification Becomes a Significant Liability

MEMORANDUM
TO: Interested Parties
FROM:Jefrey Pollock & Nick Gourevitch, Global Strategy Group; Geoff Garin, Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group
RE: Priorities USA Action Polling Memo

Mitt Romney’s Central Qualification Becomes a Significant Liability

Priorities USA Action advertising on Romney’s business record effective in moving attitudes

Mitt Romney’s business experience – the centerpiece of his case for the presidency – has proven to be
much more of a liability than an asset in key swing states. Clear negative trends have emerged in recent
polling conducted in Colorado, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia by Global Strategy Group and
Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group on behalf of Priorities USA Action. The following memo summarizes
the findings of five statewide polls consisting of over 3,800 total interviews with likely voters between
June 25 and July 3, 2012.

Voters in swing states view Romney’s main selling point – his business experience –
negatively:

• 37% of voters say that Romney’s business experience at Bain Capital make them LESS likely to vote for him. Just 27% say it makes them MORE likely to vote for him.
• 58% of swing state voters now say it is true that as a businessman, Romney's priority was making millions for himself and his investors, regardless of the impact on jobs and the employees

In all five of these swing states, more voters have an unfavorable view of Mitt Romney
than a favorable one. On average, Romney’s favorable rating across these states is 36%
favorable and 43% unfavorable.

• Mitt Romney’s numbers are particularly poor with Independent voters – among whom he has a 12-point net negative favorable rating (30% favorable/42% unfavorable).
• While Romney’s ratings are net negative in all five states, he has the highest unfavorable rating in Ohio (46%) – a state considered by many the key to the 2012 election.

In all five of these swing states, President Obama leads Mitt Romney in a head-to-head
matchup. On average, President Obama leads his Republican challenger by a 48% to 42%
margin. Among Independents, that margin is seven points (44% to 37%).

President Obama is seen as the candidate best served to meet the needs of the middle
class. By a 19-point margin, voters in these swing states see President Obama as the best
candidate to “stand up for the interests of the middle class” (50% say Obama vs. 31% who say
Romney).

• Obama also leads Romney by significant margins among a wide array of other personal traits from being the candidate “who can relate to the problems and concerns of people like you” (46% Obama vs. 34% Romney) to being the candidate who “is honest and someone you can trust” (40% Obama vs. 32% Romney).

Priorities USA’s recent ad campaign on Romney’s record as CEO of Bain Capital had a
clear negative impact on perceptions of Romney across a variety of metrics. Over the
last two months, Priorities USA has run advertising in 11 media markets across the five states
mentioned in this memo. To analyze the effectiveness of this campaign, we ran an analysis of
the markets where Priorities USA ran ads (the “Priorities markets”) versus the markets where
they did not ran ads (the “non-Priorities markets”). This made for an effective experiment as
the two groups of markets are attitudinally very similar. For example, in the 2008 campaign,
President Obama beat John McCain by a 53% to 47% margin in both the “Priorities markets”
and “the non-Priorities markets.” Additionally, our polling showed the political affiliations of
these two market groups as nearly identical (for example, 41% of voters in both market groups
self-identify as Republican or Republican-leading). But an analysis of these two market
groups shows clear differences in attitudes across a wide spectrum of metrics relating to the
Presidential race:

• In the “Priorities markets”, President Obama leads Mitt Romney by eight points (49% to 41%). In the “non-Priorities markets”, Obama leads Romney by three points (46% to 43%).
• In the “Priorities markets”, Mitt Romney’s unfavorable rating is net negative by nine points (35% favorable/44% unfavorable). In the “non-Priorities markets,” Romney’s unfavorable rating is net negative by five points (37%/42%).
• In the “Priorities markets”, 40% of voters say Mitt Romney’s record as Bain CEO make them less likely to vote for him. In the “non-Priorities markets” 34% of voters say that.
• In the “Priorities markets”, President Obama has an 11-point advantage on being the candidate that “is honest and someone you can trust”. In the “non-Priorities markets”, Obama holds a 5-point lead.

Voters Concerned About Romney's Business Record

Recent polling, focus groups, and coverage have indicated that Priorities USA Action’s focus on Romney’s business record is making an impact in key states.

Priorities USA Action has been running a $10 million ad campaign in key swing states since early May.

WP (EJ Dionne) -- Mitt Romney’s Bain Problem -- In the long run, polling in swing states suggesting that Mitt Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital is hurting him could have larger implications for where this campaign will move. It’s certainly true that had the court knocked down President Obama’s signature domestic achievement, the defeat would have been woven into a narrative of ineffectual leadership and mistaken priorities. Instead, the president found vindication not only from the court’s liberals but also from Chief Justice John Roberts. But precisely because the decision saved the president from disaster on health care, it only reinforced the importance of the economic argument Obama and Romney have been having for months. And here is where Romney’s Bain problem kicks in. As Democrats, mostly from Washington and New York, debated the efficacy of attacks on Romney’s role in Bain, an entirely different conversation was being driven in the swing states, courtesy of ads broadcast by the Obama campaign and especially by Priorities USA Action, the pro-Obama super PAC. The ads portray highly sympathetic workers who lost their jobs and companies that collapsed even as Bain’s principals made substantial profits. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll last week provided surprisingly dramatic evidence of how much these commercials are wounding Romney. READ MORE

VIDEO -- ABC NEWS: 'World News' Political Insights: Bain Attack Takes Toll on Romney, But Dems Worry About Money Race -- …Even as national polls have shown little movement in the race, something different has been happening in the battleground states. It's as if there's a parallel campaign in the states that are likely to determine the presidency, one with its own rhythms and realities. In those states, President Obama has been pulling ahead. The gaps aren't huge, but taken together, the numbers strongly suggest that Democrats' relentless attacks on Mitt Romney's business record at Bain Capital have been taking a toll. Quinnipiac University polling last week in the three big classic swing states show the president with narrow but identifiable leads. He's up four points in Florida, seven in Ohio, and six in Pennsylvania. Among the things that those states have in common is that voters there have seen an avalanche of early advertising focused on questioning Romney's business record. READ MORE

NYT: [Even GOP Strategists Agree] Bain Attacks Make Inroads for President -- Propelled by a torrent of blistering television advertisements, President Obama is successfully invoking Mitt Romney’s career at Bain Capital to raise questions about his commitment to the middle class, strategists in both parties say, as the candidates engage in a critical summer duel to set the terms for this fall. Despite doubts among some Democrats about the wisdom of attacking Mr. Romney’s business career, Obama commercials painting him as a ruthless executive who pursued profits at the expense of jobs are starting to make an impact on some undecided voters, according to strategists from both sides, who differ on whether they are causing any substantial damage. READ MORE

NBC/ WSJ POLL: Ads attacking Mitt Romney's business background have had an impact nationwide, and an especially large effect in swing states. According to MSNBC, "What’s more, the poll shows that attitudes about Romney’s business background also are more unfavorable in these battlegrounds. Among swing-state respondents, 18% say what they’ve seen and heard about Romney’s business record gives them a more POSITIVE opinion about the Republican candidate, versus 33% who say it’s more NEGATIVE. That’s compared to the national 23%-to-28% margin on this question. The obvious conclusion here is that the negative TV ads pummeling Romney in the battleground states -- like here and here and here -- are having an impact." [NBC News, 6/27/12]

Q Poll of Florida Showed Romney’s Unfavorable Rating Climbing, 15 point shift against Romney among independents. From their early May to late June poll, Quinnipiac found a 15 point shift among independents on Romney’s favorable rating. Currently, Romney is 10 points underwater with independents. [Quinnipiac]

Q Poll of Ohio Showed Romney’s Unfavorable Rating Climbing; Significant Shift on Handling of the economy.  From their early May to late June poll, Quinnipiac found a 12 point shift among independents on Romney favorables, with Romney now 13 points underwater. There was a 9 point shift towards the President on who would do a better job handling the economy and 11 point shift among independents on the same question. [Quinnipiac]

 ABC’s Amy Walter: “It is clear that ads attacking Romney for his record at Bain Capital have penetrated.” According to ABC’s Amy Walter who reported on focus groups in Richmond and Las Vegas, “As for Mitt Romney, he remains a blank slate. Most of these women knew little to nothing about him. But it is clear that ads attacking Romney for his record at Bain Capital have penetrated. Stephanie and Rebecca voted for McCain in 2008, but both expressed worry over Romney’s business record. When asked by the moderator what they’d heard or seen about the campaign so far, Rebecca replied, “That whole thing where factories have shut down, that concerns me. … That’s scary because I work for a small business.” “Little guys like us are like a gerbil on the wheel, OK?” she said.  ”Where’s my break? We don’t get anything other than another day of work”” [ABC News, 6/8/12]

LA Times: Purple Poll Shows Criticism of Romney Business Record Works. According to the Los Angeles Times, “Across the 12 battleground states the monthly poll surveys, 47% of likely voters said they agreed with the statement that private equity firms “care only about profits and short-term gains for investors. When they come in, workers get laid off, benefits disappear, and pensions are cut. Investors walk off with big returns, and working folks get stuck holding the bag.” By contrast, 38% agreed that “private investment and equity firms help the American economy grow. They launch new companies and rebuild existing ones, including some of the biggest employers in America. Their work has created millions of jobs, and will help drive America’s recovery.”… the attack on Romney’s record at Bain has “the hallmarks of a classic wedge issue for the president,” Purple Poll analysts wrote. “It consolidates Democrats (64% to 22%) and has a plurality of support among independents (48% to 38%).”” [Los Angeles Times, 6/7/12]

Public Policy Polling: Independents, by 40-11 margin, say Romney’s private sector experience makes them less likely to vote for him. Moderates, 48-8, say the same. By a 40-11 margin, independents say “Mitt Romney’s work at Bain Capital” makes them less likely to support him. Among moderates, it is a 48-8 margin. [Public Policy Polling, Conducted: 5/31-6/3]

BURTON: Romney claims on health care are intentionally dishonest and two-faced

From Bill Burton, senior strategist for Priorities USA Action:

“Mitt Romney claims on health care are intentionally dishonest and two-faced. In Massachusetts, Romney imposed a penalty for not purchasing insurance that is twice as large as the federal law that he now attacks. According to Democrats, Republicans and Romney himself, the Massachusetts law was the model for national health insurance reform. Romney’s attacks on health care reform he previously supported show the American people that he is a dishonest politician who will say anything to win an election.”

Background 

AP: Romney’s Massachusetts Individual Mandate “Is More Sweeping—And Penalizes The Uninsured More Severely—Than The Federal Law Signed This Year By Obama.” “The state universal health care law Romney signed in 2006 while Massachusetts governor required state residents to get private or government health insurance by 2007, and punished individuals and employers who did not with penalties now exceeding $1,000 per person annually…Yet the Massachusetts mandate is more sweeping - and penalizes the uninsured more severely - than the federal law signed this year by Obama, the Democrat Romney would likely face in 2012 if he won the GOP presidential nomination.” [AP, 12/15/10]

AP: Massachusetts Mandate Requires Uninsured Individuals To Pay $1,068 While The Federal Mandate Penalties “Will Be Lower And Slower To Ramp Up.” “The Massachusetts mandate requires residents to maintain health coverage meeting state-defined requirements. Those who lack coverage for more than 90 days face a penalty. The first year, they were docked an amount equal to the personalexemption on their state income tax. Now they are penalized one-half the cost of the plan they could otherwise afford, which in 2009 was $1,068 for an individual. An even bigger penalty for 2010 will be announced before the end of the year. The federal law similarly requires coverage, but with penalties that will be lower and slower to ramp up. Those who lack coverage when the mandate takes effect in 2014 will be fined either $95 or 1 percent of their adjusted gross income, whichever is greater. In 2015, the penalty will be $325, or 2percent. In 2016, it is $695, or 3 percent of adjusted gross income. Thereafter, it grows based on inflation, as it does in Massachusetts.” [AP, 12/15/10]

Romney On Massachusetts Health Care Reform: If There Are “National Implications And Applicability, That Would Be Wonderful.” According to the Associated Press, “Romney, whose father ran unsuccessfully for the GOP presidential nomination in 1968, said he understood the presidential implications of the health care bill but he didn’t want to talk about them. ‘I have nothing to add to that,’ he said with a laugh. ‘I actually ran with (health care reform) as something that I wanted to do. If there are national implications and applicability, that would be wonderful.’” [AP, 4/5/06] 

Paul Ryan: Romney’s Health Care Law  “Not that Dissimilar to ObamaCare.” According to the Associated Press, Rep. Paul Ryan said of Romney’s health care program, “It’s not that dissimilar to Obamacare. And you probably know I’m not a big fan of Obamacare.” [The Associated Press, 3/6/11]

Santorum: Romney Healthcare Plan Was “Precursor” To National Law. Politico reported that former Senator Santorum responded to Romney’s healthcare speech by saying, “I greatly respect Governor Romney and admire many of his personal and professional accomplishments, but his work to institute the precursor to national socialized medicine is not one of them. Both Romneycare and Obamacare infringe upon individual freedom and exponentially increase the government’s healthcare cost burden. Romneycare has, in fact, not made healthcare better or saved costs in Massachusetts. It’s done just the opposite.” [Politico, 5/12/11]

Huntsman: Romney Has Little Credibility to Criticize Health Care. According to ABC News, JonHuntsman said of Romney, “If you’re talking about free market health care, the kind we did in Utah, and the kind that is needed in this country, then he has little credibility… Little credibility based on the model that was created in Massachusetts.” [VIDEO, ABC News, 6/22/11]

National Review: Romney “Repeatedly Said That He Sees The Massachusetts Plan As A Model For The Nation And Has UrgedOther States To Copy His Approach.” According to the National Review, “Finally, Romney criticizes Obamacare as a ‘one size fits all’ federal plan, whereas his plan was implemented in only one state… Of course, as governor, Romney didn’t have the power to impose his model outside of his state. He now says that he opposes any national plan, calling for states to experiment with different approaches as the “laboratories of democracy.” That would certainly be an improvement over Obamacare. On the other hand, he has repeatedly said that he sees the Massachusetts plan as amodel for the nation and has urged other states to copy his approach.” [National Review, 12/1/10] 

Romney Said Massachusetts Health Care Reform Was A “Great Program” And Was “A Great Opportunity For The Entire Country.”  While at the MSNBC Republican Primary debate Mitt Romney was asked “Governor Romney a year ago it seemed you couldn’t wait to tell the world about your health care experiment in Massachusetts.  Since then it’s been criticized by conservatives as something HillaryClinton could have devised. You hardly mention it on your website.  What’s changed?”  Mitt Romney responded “I love it.  It’s a fabulous program.  I’m delighted in a fact that we in our state worked together across the aisle Republicans and Democrats to find a way to get health care for all of our citizens that’s affordable and that portable.  Now I know that there are some people that don’t like it, but when it came time to vote we won 198 to 2.  The Heritage Foundation worked on it with us.  We had people on both side of the aisle.  No I know that there are some people who wonder about it.  Senator Kennedy at the signing of the bill, we were all there together he said you know if you got Mitt Romney and Ted Kennedy agreeing to the same bill it means one thing.  One of us didn’t read it, but I helped write it.  And I knew it well.  And this is a country that can get all of our people insured, without a government takeover.  Without Hillarycare.   Without socialized medicine, instead get the market to do its job.  Let people who have health care they can afford.  Get the market to do its job, let people have the opportunity to choose policies in the private sector.  We didn’t expand government programs, we didn’t raise taxes.  There was no Government takeover.  The market can work to solve our health care needs.  And that’s the great and exciting news and 27 other states are working on health care reform right now.  It’s a great program.  A great opportunity for the entire country.”  [MSNBC Presidential Debate, 5/3/07, 1:01:22]

Romney Said I “Was Able To Put In Place A Plan That Helped Get Health Insurance Premiums Down, And Get All Of Our Citizens Insured. If We Can Do That Nationally, We Help…The Entire Nation.” Romney said, “One is to finally get a grip on the extraordinary increase in the cost of health care. That’s one of the big legacy cost features. I went after that in Massachusetts, was able to put in place a plan that helped get health insurance premiums down, and gets all of our citizens insured. If we can do that nationally, we help not only Michigan and the auto industry, but the entire nation.” [CNN, 1/14/08]

Detroit News: Romney Portrayed Massachusetts Health Care Reform As A “Potential Template For National Reforms.” According to Detroit News, “Romney portrayed the health-care reform passed when he was Massachusetts governor as a potential template for national reforms, and as an example of his governing philosophy. The plan - which mandated that nearly all uninsured residents buy private health insurance while making insurance costs more affordable and aiding low-income residents in paying their costs - was the product of two years of intensivestudy, involving health-care experts, management consultants and complex computer modeling of Massachusetts residents’ behavior, Romney said.” [Detroit News, 12/9/07]

Romney Said Massachusetts Health Care Reform Is A “Model That Worked.” On Meet the Press, Romney said “We have a model that worked. One state in America, my state, was able to put in place a plan that got everybody health insurance, and it did not require a public/government insurance company. That’s the last thing America needs. You know exactly what it is.” [Meet The Press, 6/28/09]

Romney Said That The Massachusetts Plan “Will Be A Model For The Nation.” According to Newsweek, “During a speech in Baltimore on Feb. 2, 2007, Romney outlined his ambitions for the Massachusetts plan. ‘I’m proud of what we’ve done,’ he said. ‘If Massachusetts succeeds in implementing it, then that will be a model for the nation.’ Last month Romney’s dream came true. If Republicans knew what was good for them, they would stop treating it as a nightmare.” [Newsweek, 4/16/10]

The New York Times: Mr. Romney Has Repeatedly Suggested That He Believed That The Massachusetts Program — And In Particular Its Mandate For Individuals To Purchase Health Insurance Plans — Would Be A Good Model For The Rest Of The Country. According to New York Times, “Not exactly. Mr. Romney has repeatedly suggested that he believed that the Massachusettsprogram — and in particular its mandate for individuals to purchase health insurance plans — would be a good model for the rest of the country. During an appearance on ‘Meet the Press’ in December 2007, Mr. Romney said that while he did believed that every state would face different circumstances, his program was ‘a good model for other states.’ ‘I think it’s a good model for other states. Maybe not every state but most, and so what I’d do at the federal level is give every state the same kind of flexibility we got from the federal government as well as some carrots and sticks to actually get all their citizens insured. And I think a lot of states will choose what we did.’ Mr. Romney added that he would not want a policy that would force other states to adopt the Massachusetts model — which Mr. Obama’s health care bill, in some sense, does — but suggested that other states should consider the mandate. ‘So if a state chose a mandate, it wouldn’t bother you?’ asked the host, Tim Russert. ‘I’d think it’s a terrific idea,’ Mr. Romney answered. ‘I think you’re going to find when it’s all said and done, after all these states that are the laboratories of democracy get their chance to try their own plans, those who follow the path that we pursued will find it’s the best path, and we’ll end up with a nation that’s taken a mandate approach.’” [The New York Times, 10/18/11]