Newsweek: There’s only one man for the job of overseeing ObamaCare

posted at 10:04 pm on March 29, 2010 by Allahpundit

To repurpose an old joke, you know who this article doesn’t benefit? Mitt Romney.

As I see it, there are three principal requirements for the job. The first is experience in management, business, and organization: maybe someone who’s worked as a management consultant, an entrepreneur, and an executive in both the public and private sectors. The second is the ability and capacity to commit: someone who isn’t likely to have any pressing obligations for the next several years, and who has enough cash that he or she doesn’t need a large private-sector salary. Third is relevant experience in implementing a large-scale health-care reform program, ideally one that involved using an individual mandate and the private insurance system to attain near-universal health insurance.

In other words, this sounds like a job for Mitt Romney. He may be the only man in America who meets all three criteria…

Will he have the time? Well, Romney is clearly running for president in 2012. But let’s be honest. Romney looks good on paper, but he is a poor campaigner. His 2008 campaign wasn’t quite as pathetic as Rudy Giuliani’s. But it was disappointing. Over the course of a year, Romney raised a lot of money and matched it with lots of his own. He did win several caucuses, but they were mostly in states with large Mormon populations, or states in the Republican kill zone of New England, or states where his dad used to be governor (Michigan). He came in third in the delegate count.

Can he do better in two years? The emergence of Sarah Palin and continuing shifts in the Republican Party would seem to make it harder for Romney to win in 2012 than in 2008. Romney is an establishment, big-business kind of guy who played a social moderate when he ran Massachusetts. And in the past two years, the Republican Party has become more anti-establishment, more hostile to big business, and more hostile to social moderates.

“Hello, Mitt? Barack Obama. Listen, how would you like to give up your dream of becoming president in order to oversee a completely unmanageable boondoggle that’ll singlehandedly give me the bipartisan cover on health care that I desperately need? Right — the one you just called an ‘unconscionable abuse of power.’ How does $89,000 a year sound? Hello?”

The latest analogy to Mitt’s RomneyCare predicament is Hillary’s 2002 Iraq vote, which she ended up having to kinda sorta defend throughout the primaries even though her base hated her for it. But as Ambinder notes, Iraq didn’t end up deciding the race even though it was the most important issue in early 2007 when the race began. And despite the war baggage and a mismanaged campaign, she still nearly won. Stuff happens and narratives emerge (Hopenchange vs. the Clinton “machine”), and the stronger the narratives become, the less that individual policy decisions matter. That’s not to say RomCare won’t be an albatross around Mitt’s neck — it will — but it won’t be the only factor in the mix, no matter how incensed righties might be about it right now. Electability will matter, as will organizational competence and the Christian vote and foreign-policy unknowns and fundraising fundraising fundraising. Maybe the balance tips against him, maybe not, but it will be a balance. Think of it this way: We’re roughly as close in time right now to the 2008 primaries as we are to the 2012 ones. Think how much has happened since then, and how your own political concerns have changed. Lots of time left.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Shout-out to Knucklehead for calling this article!

MeatHeadinCA on March 29, 2010 at 10:05 PM

Think of it this way: We’re roughly as close in time right now to the 2008 primaries as we are to the 2012 ones. Think how much has happened since then, and how your own political concerns have changed. Lots of time left.

I don’t believe my political concerns have changed one bit.

TXMomof3 on March 29, 2010 at 10:08 PM

who was that one guy they put in Obama’s administration because they were “threatened” by him? Guv. of Utah, right?

deidre on March 29, 2010 at 10:09 PM

To repurpose an old joke, you know who this article doesn’t benefit? Mitt Romney.

No s**t! Good god, what did Mitt ever do to Newsweek?

AUINSC on March 29, 2010 at 10:09 PM

now that is funny.

rob verdi on March 29, 2010 at 10:10 PM

Was Romney the first true Crist?

rob verdi on March 29, 2010 at 10:10 PM

How many people at Mitt’s book signing today? BTW, he didn’t wear Mom jeans to the signing…just jeans. Man of the people.

d1carter on March 29, 2010 at 10:12 PM

The economy will decide 2012.

GarandFan on March 29, 2010 at 10:13 PM

It is interesting that as soon as a bunch of polls come out showing Romney is well positioned to defeat Obama, liberal MSMs like Newsweek and Politico start attacking him on the so called Romneycare. The libs are trying to chip away at every potential and viable Republican candidate early on, with the voluntary and more than happy help of the MSMs. Pravda had nothing on these folks. I say, let’s put out a poll that shows that Tom Tancradoe or even McCain is most likely to beat Obama and see what happens.

immigrantchick on March 29, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Stick a fork in Mitt.

El_Terrible on March 29, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Too late to help Romney anyway. He is no longer a viable candidate for President in a conservative Republican Party. At this point I don’t think that even a Damascus experience will help. It’s all over but the shovels of dirt raining down.
Randy

williars on March 29, 2010 at 10:14 PM

If – and I will concede that it is a very BIG if – we consider that the top eighty right-wing bloggers might just be somewhat reflective of the state of the conservative/right-wing mind (Chamberlain-esque candy a$$ RINO’s and Coastal Elites excepted, of course, hehehe) then Mr. Rommney has a bit of an uphill trek with the base.

Quoted from the poll linked elsewhere on HA…

How do you feel about Sarah Palin?
Strongly like: 53% (43 votes)
Like: 38% (31 votes)
Dislike: 6% (5 votes)
Strongly dislike: 2% (2 votes)

How do you feel about Mitt Romney?
Strongly like: 12% (10 votes)
Like: 44% (35 votes)
Dislike: 32% (25 votes)
Strongly dislike: 10% (8 votes)

Hmmmmmmm…… ;)

Kirin on March 29, 2010 at 10:14 PM

That’ll leave a mark. Must be their apology to Sarah for the running shorts cover.

SouthernGent on March 29, 2010 at 10:15 PM

You should put a few more links to this article on Hot Air… 2 isn’t enough. If this were a real controversy, why do you and the liberals have to hype it so much?

Dr B on March 29, 2010 at 10:15 PM

Well if Newsweek says it so…

… then by all means, it must be true.

/

Seven Percent Solution on March 29, 2010 at 10:16 PM

In other words, this sounds like a job for Mitt Romney. He may be the only man in America who meets all three criteria…

Take the job Mittens, it’s about as close to the WH as you are going to get.

farright on March 29, 2010 at 10:18 PM

Think how much has happened since then, and how your own political concerns have changed. Lots of time left.

Be sure to remember this little gem of wisdom the next time you make a Palin post, Allahpundit/84%er.

portlandon on March 29, 2010 at 10:19 PM

Allah -

According to the local press, Mitt had “about 100″ at his book signing in Des Moines:

http://www.globegazette.com/articles/2010/03/29/news/latest/doc4bb118510bee1102867308.txt#vmix_media_id=12124234

I had more people than that laughing at me the last time I locked my keys in the car. His book is out of the amazon.com top 200 in less than one month.

Not good signs.

bw222 on March 29, 2010 at 10:20 PM

The economy will decide 2012.

GarandFan on March 29, 2010 at 10:13 PM

I agree, but one of the reasons Obamacare will be such a controversial issue in 2012 is precisely because of its effect on the economy. So whatever Mitt gains politically from his economic cred, he loses due to his history with Romneycare.

I don’t think his Presidential campaign is dead, but it’s not looking good. Honestly, it ultimately comes down to who else is running. McCain was able to win the nomination because he was the last one standing among a really weak field. Romney would essentially have to have things play out the same way.

Doughboy on March 29, 2010 at 10:20 PM

Stick a fork in Mitt.

El_Terrible on March 29, 2010 at 10:14 PM

That should be spork…

Seven Percent Solution on March 29, 2010 at 10:21 PM

Brad Jones says this about Romneycare

Our plan has proven fiscally smart. The program costs less than 1.5% of the state budget, well within its original forecast. We don’t yet know whether Obamacare would cost more or less than projected, but a disturbing number of optimistic projections and fiscal gimmicks in the bill suggest it will cost more than anticipated.

Higher taxes on individuals and businesses were not part of our plan – while nearly $1 trillion in higher taxes are a big part of what funds Obamacare.

Nor did we seek to control insurance premiums. Obamacare gives government this power.

Our plan did not cut Medicaid or Medicare. Obamacare will divert $1.1 trillion away from Medicare, which is barely solvent as is.

The Massachusetts legislation was 70 pages long, and easy for the people to understand. Obamacare is a frightening 2,000-page bill. This is more than symbolic; it means the bill is filled with myriad surprises for the taxpayers.

The final big difference is perhaps most important of all: Ours is a state plan, not a federal plan imposed on the entire country.

Romney is raising money to repeal Obamacare

PrezHussein on March 29, 2010 at 10:21 PM

What the hell are they talking about? The GOP just elected a “social moderate” in Mass, and nominated multiple social moderates in places like Illinois (Kirk).

therightwinger on March 29, 2010 at 10:22 PM

The latest analogy to Mitt’s RomneyCare predicament is Hillary’s 2002 Iraq vote, which she ended up having to kinda sorta defend throughout the primaries even though her base hated her for it.

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

MB4 on March 29, 2010 at 10:28 PM

So basically we will be told by the establishment, that Mitt has the money so we should elect him as our nominee. Great, Mitt has the money, but if we get the right guy then that person would be able to have the money as well. But instead of it flowing in from Washington Insiders and the Republican establishment, the money would be flowing in from fired up Americans who want to beat Obama in the polls and feel that this “right guy’ is the one to do it.

Lets not have the establishment telling us once again who we should vote for. Let’s pass on Mitt the money guy, and find a true conservative guy who can stand up against Obama.

texasconserv on March 29, 2010 at 10:32 PM

Good Lord. Mitt Romney again. I’m just about fed up with the relentless pushing of this guy into my awareness. As a presidential candidate, he is weak as a fizzy drink, and he has already screwed Massachussets healthcare up beyond repair. I’d like to see some informative articles about Michele Bachman, Mike Pence, Paul Ryan for a change but every 2nd article at HA is about mittens. NEXT…

fullogas on March 29, 2010 at 10:34 PM

Don’t go for it Mitt!
Sarahs’ gonna need you to be in charge of repealing Obamacare, closing down wasteful useless Gov’t depts., (Education), eliminating most social programs, selling off the lavish perks of office, reducing entitlement spending and restoring free markets, capitalism and personal freedom. Its’ a cabinet postion and you would be much more helpful and qualified to accept this than to try to rescue a program that cannot by its very nature work!

dhunter on March 29, 2010 at 10:35 PM

To repurpose an old joke, you know who this article doesn’t benefit? Mitt Romney.

that’s the left’s MO. Pull a guy in close then shiv him in the ribs. They’re thinking, “Hey, we gots us a crap sandwich, we hear Mitt loves socialist healthcare crap sandwiches, let’s get Mitt to eat it.” Said column is produced, prettied up, and before you know it, slick lookin’ hit piece that serves as The Won’s reelection material. Voila’

got these Clucker Chucker’s figured out…

ted c on March 29, 2010 at 10:36 PM

What’s Lyle Waggoner doing on Hot Air again?

kingsjester on March 29, 2010 at 10:37 PM

hey, this post ain’t be got no exit question. Those bloggers that got you 84% luvs exit questions. so do commenters.

ted c on March 29, 2010 at 10:37 PM

“Hello, Mitt? Barack Obama. Listen, how would you like to give up your dream of becoming president in order to oversee a completely unmanageable boondoggle that’ll singlehandedly give me the bipartisan cover on health care that I desperately need? Right — the one you just called an ‘unconscionable abuse of power.’ How does $89,000 a year sound? Hello?”

“Mr. President, please have the media do something to you, or vice versa”.

Schadenfreude on March 29, 2010 at 10:38 PM

Any Republican who accepts a job from Obama is dead in my book.

disa on March 29, 2010 at 10:40 PM

If you liked how Dole did in 1996, you’re gonna love Mittens in 2012. Like Dole, Romney would be the GOP’s living repudiation of its own anti-big government, anti-status quo agenda. God save the republic if Republicans elected in 2010 cannot be faithful to their vows even for two years.

Terrie on March 29, 2010 at 10:41 PM

Mittens: “Do I look like Mrs. Obama?”

farright on March 29, 2010 at 10:43 PM

Overall, Mitt stands to do well I think. Look for Santorum to gain in Iowa (at Huckabee’s expense). He’s already raised $710,000. For zero name recognition outside of PA, that’s not bad.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10088/1046433-84.stm

Utica681 on March 29, 2010 at 10:44 PM

Socialised health care has been a failure (or soon will be) in every country it has been tried. What difference does it make who runs it.

Crux Australis on March 29, 2010 at 10:45 PM

The great contrast between “Romneycare” to Obamacare:

4 years after the Massachusetts healthcare reform; by all accounts in New England the plan is rated positively. The residents of MA view the plan positively by 68% in a recent poll held in late January 2010 by the Washington Post. The American Medical News has surveyed that 91% of the people in MA who have health coverage are satisfied with it as late as November of 2009. The New England Journal of Medicine held a poll and interviews from physicians in MA that rated the plan. Of 2,135 practicing Massachusetts physicians who responded tothe poll, 70% said they support the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Law, whereas 13% oppose it. Finally, contrary to some critics who say the law is bankrupting the state. The independent Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation has analysis that nothing could be further from the truth. The plan costs 1.5% of the state budget, which is hardly breaking the bank on any known budget.

SED on March 29, 2010 at 10:45 PM

The BEST man for the job is Gov. Phil Bredesen (Tennessee), Democrat. His term is ending so he has plenty of time. He founded Healthcare America corp that grew to over 6000 employees. Newsweek won’t likely support Bredesen for the job though as he successfully rescued Tennessee from bankrupsty by limiting TennCare.

TN Mom on March 29, 2010 at 10:47 PM

kingsjester on March 29, 2010 at 10:37 PM

Bwahahahahaha
Randy

williars on March 29, 2010 at 10:51 PM

THIS IS A SET UP …… Just like they praised McCain before his nomination. If Romney is nominated … then the Obamacare fiasco will be neutralized by Romney’s in Mass. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

aniladesai on March 29, 2010 at 10:51 PM

manwithblackhat on March 29, 2010 at 10:47 PM

Thanks, but I don’t want to participate in ridiculing him (guess I shouldn’t have called him mittens, sry). Just don’t want to hear any more about him. AS someone already said, stick a fork/spork – he’s done imo.

fullogas on March 29, 2010 at 10:54 PM

Socialised health care has been a failure (or soon will be) in every country it has been tried. What difference does it make who runs it.

Crux Australis on March 29, 2010 at 10:45 PM

Hey mate. For once I actually agree with you.

fullogas on March 29, 2010 at 10:55 PM

Mittens: “Do I look like Mrs. Obama?”

farright on March 29, 2010 at 10:43 PM

Now that’s teh funny!

ElectricPhase on March 29, 2010 at 11:02 PM

I used to have a tiny bit of respect for Mittens.. but now.. uh-huh.

popularpeoplesfront on March 29, 2010 at 11:06 PM

I may not be interested in going to his signing or interested in reading his book…but does that mean I don’t believe he is our best choice (at this moment) of being a good candidate? Right now. Yes. Conservatives have so few viable candidates. I like Palin. I like Newt. I like Romney. I wish we could combine them all into ONE person. Please…no more McCain’s. He deserves to be honored; but did not represent our conservative values to the utmost. I want a Leader. Someone who will speak out!! Someone who will be an American representative and not interested in being a part of the “global community”.

jatfla on March 29, 2010 at 11:07 PM

That’s not to say RomCare won’t be an albatross around Mitt’s neck — it will — but it won’t be the only factor in the mix …

Absolutely right about that … there WILL be other factors. Factors like – Mitt Romney’s many “flip flops” … which make John Kerry look like a lighthouse of firmness.

Other factors will be his Mormon faith – but no, not to conservatives – conservatives of faith are the only people who can understand the Mormon faith outside of Mormons themselves. Conservatives of faith actually admire the Mormons for their steadfast devotion to principles in a world that increasingly ridicules them …

No … his faith won’t be the problem for Conservatives – his flip flops and Socialist Health Care system will be what keeps them from voting for him.

His faith will be the problem with liberals … to whom Mormons are strange animals who have something wrong with them.

In short – Mitt Romney is a “perfect storm” for failure … he won’t be able to excite the Conservative base and he won’t get votes from indies or Dems.

Why not just run McRage a few more times? Maybe you can get Sarah to throw her weight behind him out of loyalty – at least there’s a shot there.

With Mitt … not so much. Did you see the video where Mitt DEFENDS the individual mandate?

Devastating.

HondaV65 on March 29, 2010 at 11:28 PM

THIS IS A SET UP …… Just like they praised McCain before his nomination. If Romney is nominated … then the Obamacare fiasco will be neutralized by Romney’s in Mass. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

aniladesai on March 29, 2010 at 10:51 PM

You are smarter than many Conservative Bloggers and pundits my friend.

This is not rocket science. Anyone hoping for Mitt to revive himself is just … high.

HondaV65 on March 29, 2010 at 11:31 PM

Why hasn’t the man denounced and repented of the monstrosity which is RomneyCare? Why does he still defend it?

Denounce it, accept the recriminations as due process and start afresh. There is no other course that he can take. Just isn’t rational.

Meh, Romney’s a climber, I guess.

spmat on March 29, 2010 at 11:34 PM

I think the Gop is overthinking this

Romney is IMO a great candidate, he has experience at Bain Capital that will be worth its weight in gold, heh.

The Romneycare thing is simple I think-
he did what the state wanted , MASS a blue blue liberal state wanted to use its state as a laboratory to experiment, like the founders wanted.

His position is clear, the federal govt has no business with mandates. What the STATES choose to do with their powers is up to the people oif said states,

I think he is a great example of governing with the will and consent of the people, something the Dummies in the Dem leadership are befuddled by

I would love to vote for Romney.

Of course I am a recovering Dem, but if you nominate him we blue collar Dems will swing to him like with Scott Brown, Reagan..a few million us voted McCain fearing socialist policies from Obama and Pelosi, and we were right, but the millions of Dems who followed the leadership are against them now and looking for economic sanity-Mitt Romney baby.

health care experimentation is appropriately left to the states, as the Gov of deep blue Mass we governed with the peoples will, the Federal govt has no place in mandates, and romney will govern with the will of the American people.

SOLD!Sweeping victory!

ginaswo on March 30, 2010 at 12:13 AM

Pretty sure Romney will be president in ’13 if Palin says no.

But Allah, a Newsweek article then saying “oh yes”.
Wow. This is the same mag that said after O won that “we’re all socialists” right?

DUDE.

B Man on March 30, 2010 at 12:21 AM

If business success is more important than conservative values, let’s nominate Warren Buffett. At least he was against ObamaCare (aka RomneyCare).

Terrie on March 30, 2010 at 12:26 AM

I saw this over at mittromneycentral.com:

(Statement from his Pac)
“Today, Mitt Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC announced a new donation program, dubbed “Prescription for Repeal,” to support conservative candidates who will repeal the worst aspects of Obamacare and restore commonsense principles to healthcare.”

So now he only wants to repeal the “worst parts?” A scalpel is not what we need…the framework will still be there. We need a hatchet!

takeamericabackin10 on March 30, 2010 at 12:28 AM

ginaswo on March 30, 2010 at 12:13 AM
I agree and thanks for some sane thinking.
There is a lot of time to go and we have got
to stop picking everyone of our people apart.
I love Sarah, I like Newt (but I think his time
is over), I like Ryan, and I love Liz Cheney,
and I also like Mitt.

Bambi on March 30, 2010 at 12:33 AM

For you cats that think RomneyCare is some kind of businessman, and economic genius, think again.

Mittens ran on creating jobs, and by the time he got done Massachusetts was #50 out of 50 states in job creation. And the economy was ginning right along back then.

Someone else mentioned Willard and Ronald Reagan in the same sentence. Sacrilege! Willard and Jeb Bush went on a “to hell with Reagan” tour a few years back. If that loser tries to claim the Reagan mantle you can bet your arse that won’t fly.

Romney will never, ever , EVER be president. He will never be the nominee.

Oh hell, it’s a moot point. Sarah is getting ready to run and anyone else in the field will just be filler, including Obama.

Not only will Sarah beat Obama like a rented mule, she actually knows how to run stuff, and run it well. unlike RomneyCare.

gary4205 on March 30, 2010 at 12:42 AM

Subject: New Boards and Commissions created by the new “Health Care” Bill

plus 16,500 IRS agents to enforce it.

Thought you would like to know the following.

Subject: Fw: New Boards and Commissions created in the NEW OBAMA HEALTH BILL

1. Grant program for consumer assistance offices (Section 1002, p. 37)
2. Grant program for states to monitor premium increases (Section 1003, p. 42)
3. Committee to review administrative simplification standards (Section 1104, p. 71)
4. Demonstration program for state wellness programs (Section 1201, p. 93)
5. Grant program to establish state Exchanges (Section 1311(a), p. 130)
6. State American Health Benefit Exchanges (Section 1311(b), p. 131)
7. Exchange grants to establish consumer navigator programs (Section 1311(i), p. 150)
8. Grant program for state cooperatives (Section 1322, p. 169)
9. Advisory board for state cooperatives (Section 1322(b)(3), p. 173)
10. Private purchasing council for state cooperatives (Section 1322(d), p. 177)
11. State basic health plan programs (Section 1331, p. 201)
12. State-based reinsurance program (Section 1341, p. 226)
13. Program of risk corridors for individual and small group markets (Section 1342, p. 233)
14. Program to determine eligibility for Exchange participation (Section 1411, p. 267)
15. Program for advance determination of tax credit eligibility (Section 1412, p. 288)
16. Grant program to implement health IT enrollment standards (Section 1561, p. 370)
17 Federal Coordinated Health Care Office for dual eligible beneficiaries (Section 2602, p. 512)
18. Medicaid quality measurement program (Section 2701, p. 518)
19. Medicaid health home program for people with chronic conditions, and grants for planning same (Section 2703, p. 524)
20 Medicaid demonstration project to evaluate bundled payments (Section 2704, p. 532)
21. Medicaid demonstration project for global payment system (Section 2705, p. 536)
22. Medicaid demonstration project for accountable care organizations (Section 2706, p. 538)
23. Medicaid demonstration project for emergency psychiatric care (Section 2707, p. 540)
24. Grant program for delivery of services to individuals with postpartum depression (Section 2952(b), p. 591)
25. State allotments for grants to promote personal responsibility education programs (Section 2953, p. 596)
26. Medicare value-based purchasing program (Section 3001(a), p. 613)
27. Medicare value-based purchasing demonstration program for critical access hospitals (Section 3001(b), p. 637)
28. Medicare value-based purchasing program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 3006(a), p. 666)
29. Medicare value-based purchasing program for home health agencies (Section 3006(b), p. 668)
30. Interagency Working Group on Health Care Quality (Section 3012, p. 688)
31. Grant program to develop health care quality measures (Section 3013, p. 693)
32. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 3021, p. 712)
33. Medicare shared savings program (Section 3022, p. 728)
34. Medicare pilot program on payment bundling (Section 3023, p. 739)
35. Independence at home medical practice demonstration program (Section 3024, p. 752)
36. Program for use of patient safety organizations to reduce hospital readmission rates (Section 3025(b), p. 775)
37. Community-based care transitions program (Section 3026, p. 776)
38. Demonstration project for payment of complex diagnostic laboratory tests (Section 3113, p. 800)
39. Medicare hospice concurrent care demonstration project (Section 3140, p. 850)
40. Independent Payment Advisory Board (Section 3403, p. 982)
41. Consumer Advisory Council for Independent Payment Advisory Board (Section 3403, p. 1027)
42. Grant program for technical assistance to providers implementing health quality practices (Section 3501, p. 1043)
43. Grant program to establish interdisciplinary health teams (Section 3502, p. 1048)
44. Grant program to implement medication therapy management (Section 3503, p. 1055)
45. Grant program to support emergency care pilot programs (Section 3504, p. 1061)
46. Grant program to promote universal access to trauma services (Section 3505(b), p. 1081)
47. Grant program to develop and promote shared decision-making aids (Section 3506, p. 1088)
48. Grant program to support implementation of shared decision-making (Section 3506, p. 1091)
49. Grant program to integrate quality improvement in clinical education (Section 3508, p. 1095)
50. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health (Section 3509(a), p. 1098)
51. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(b), p. 1102)
52. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(e), p. 1105)
53. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(f), p. 1106)
54. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(g), p. 1109)
55. National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council (Section 4001, p. 1114)
56. Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health (Section 4001(f), p. 1117)
57. Prevention and Public Health Fund (Section 4002, p. 1121)
58. Community Preventive Services Task Force (Section 4003(b), p. 1126)
59. Grant program to support school-based health centers (Section 4101, p. 1135)
60. Grant program to promote research-based dental caries disease management (Section 4102, p. 1147)
61. Grant program for States to prevent chronic disease in Medicaid beneficiaries (Section 4108, p. 1174)
62. Community transformation grants (Section 4201, p. 1182)
63. Grant program to provide public health interventions (Section 4202, p 1188)
64. Demonstration program of grants to improve child immunization rates (Section 4204(b), p. 1200)
65. Pilot program for risk-factor assessments provided through community health centers (Section 4206, p. 1215)
66. Grant program to increase epidemiology and laboratory capacity (Section 4304, p. 1233)
67. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 4305, p. 1238)
68. National Health Care Workforce Commission (Section 5101, p. 1256)
69. Grant program to plan health care workforce development activities (Section 5102(c), p. 1275)
70. Grant program to implement health care workforce development activities (Section 5102(d), p. 1279)
71. Pediatric specialty loan repayment program (Section 5203, p. 1295)
72. Public Health Workforce Loan Repayment Program (Section 5204, p. 1300)
73. Allied Health Loan Forgiveness Program (Section 5205, p. 1305)
74. Grant program to provide mid-career training for health professionals (Section 5206, p. 1307)
75. Grant program to fund nurse-managed health clinics (Section 5208, p. 1310)
76. Grant program to support primary care training programs (Section 5301, p. 1315)
77. Grant program to fund training for direct care workers (Section 5302, p. 1322)
78. Grant program to develop dental training programs (Section 5303, p. 1325)
79. Demonstration program to increase access to dental health care in underserved communities (Section 5304, p. 1331)
80. Grant program to promote geriatric education centers (Section 5305, p. 1334)
81. Grant program to promote health professionals entering geriatrics (Section 5305, p. 1339)
82. Grant program to promote training in mental and behavioral health (Section 5306, p. 1344)
83. Grant program to promote nurse retention programs (Section 5309, p. 1354)
84. Student loan forgiveness for nursing school faculty (Section 5311(b), p. 1360)
85. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors and outcomes (Section 5313, p. 1364)
86. Public Health Sciences Track for medical students (Section 5315, p. 1372)
87. Primary Care Extension Program to educate providers (Section 5405, p. 1404)
88. Grant program for demonstration projects to address health workforce shortage needs (Section 5507, p. 1442)
89. Grant program for demonstration projects to develop training programs for home health aides (Section 5507, p. 1447)
90 Grant program to establish new primary care residency programs (Section 5508(a), p. 1458)
91. Program of payments to teaching health centers that sponsor medical residency training (Section 5508(c), p. 1462)
92. Graduate nurse education demonstration program (Section 5509, p. 1472)
93. Grant program to establish demonstration projects for community- based mental health settings (Section 5604, p. 1486)
94. Commission on Key National Indicators (Section 5605, p. 1489)
95. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 6102, p. 1554)
96. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 6103(a)(3), p. 1561)
97. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 6103(b)(3), p. 1568)
98. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 6112, p. 1589)
99. Demonstration projects for nursing facilities involved in the culture change movement (Section 6114, p. 1597)
100. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1619)
101. Standing methodology committee for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1629)
102. Board of Governors for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1638)
103. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (Section 6301(e), p. 1656)
104. Elder Justice Coordinating Council (Section 6703, p. 1773)
105. Advisory Board on Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation (Section 6703, p. 1776)
106. Grant program to create elder abuse forensic centers (Section 6703, p. 1783)
107. Grant program to promote continuing education for long-term care staffers (Section 6703, p. 1787)
108. Grant program to improve management practices and training (Section 6703, p. 1788)
109. Grant program to subsidize costs of electronic health records (Section 6703, p. 1791)
110. Grant program to promote adult protective services (Section 6703, p. 1796)
111. Grant program to conduct elder abuse detection and prevention (Section 6703, p. 1798)
112. Grant program to support long-term care ombudsmen (Section 6703, p. 1800)
113. National Training Institute for long-term care surveyors (Section 6703, p. 1806)
114 Grant program to fund State surveys of long-term care residences (Section 6703, p. 1809)
115. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 8002, p. 1926)
116. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 8002, p. 1927)
117. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 8002, p. 1931)
118. Personal Care Attendants Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 8002(c), p. 1938)
119 Multi-state health plans offered by Office of Personnel Management (Section 10104(p), p. 2086)
120. Advisory board for multi-state health plans (Section 10104(p), p. 2094)
121. Pregnancy Assistance Fund (Section 10212, p. 2164)
122. Value-based purchasing program for ambulatory surgical centers (Section 10301, p. 2176)
123. Demonstration project for payment adjustments to home health services (Section 10315, p. 2200)
124. Pilot program for care of individuals in environmental emergency declaration areas (Section 10323, p. 2223)
125. Grant program to screen at-risk individuals for environmental health conditions (Section 10323(b), p. 2231)
126. Pilot programs to implement value-based purchasing (Section 10326, p. 2242)
127. Grant program to support community-based collaborative care networks (Section 10333, p. 2265)
128. Centers for Disease Control Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
129. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
130. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
131. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
132. Food and Drug Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
133. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
134. Grant program to promote small business wellness programs (Section 10408, p 2285)
135. Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p. 2289)
136. Cures Acceleration Network Review Board (Section 10409, p. 2291)
137. Grant program for Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p. 2297)
138. Grant program to promote centers of excellence for depression (Section 10410, p. 2304)
139. Advisory committee for young women’s breast health awareness education campaign (Section 10413, p. 2322)
140. Grant program to provide assistance to provide information to young women with breast cancer (Section 10413, p. 2326)
141. Interagency Access to Health Care in Alaska Task Force (Section 10501, p. 2329)
142. Grant program to train nurse practitioners as primary care providers (Section 10501(e), p. 2332)
143. Grant program for community-based diabetes prevention (Section 10501(g), p. 2337)
144. Grant program for providers who treat a high percentage of medically underserved populations (Section 10501(k), p. 2343)
145. Grant program to recruit students to practice in underserved communities (Section 10501(l), p. 2344)
146. Community Health Center Fund (Section 10503, p. 2355)
147. Demonstration project to provide access to health care for the uninsured at reduced fees (Section 10504, p. 2357)
148. Demonstration program to explore alternatives to tort litigation (Section 10607, p. 2369)
149. Indian Health demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (S. 1790, Section 112, p. 24)*
150. Office of Indian Men’s Health (S. 1790, Section 136, p. 71)*
151. Indian Country modular component facilities demonstration program (S. 1790, Section 146, p. 108)*
152. Indian mobile health stations demonstration program (S. 1790, Section 147, p. 111)*
153. Office of Direct Service Tribes (S. 1790, Section 172, p. 151)*
154. Indian Health Service mental health technician training program (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 173)*
155. Indian Health Service program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 192)*
156. Indian Health Service program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 194)*
157. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 204)*
158. Indian youth life skills demonstration project (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 220)*
159. Indian Health Service Director of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Treatment (S. 1790, Section 199B, p. 258)*

*Section 10221, page 2173 of H.R. 3590 deems that S. 1790 shall be deemed as passed with certain amendment

onlineanalyst on March 30, 2010 at 12:53 AM

Mittens is the wrong man at the wrong time. No way in hell Mitt gets support from the tea partiers.

That is a one way ticket to defeat for the Republicans. America needs someone they can relate to politically and spiritually.

Mittens and his Joseph Smith mythology of the scrying device and the magical appearance of the white Jesus in America doesn’t fill the bill.

Mr Purple on March 30, 2010 at 1:00 AM

Republican kill zone

??
Gross obviously wants all Republicans killed. Where’s the media on his violent rhetoric? Geeesh ;)

woohoo on March 30, 2010 at 1:14 AM

I have this theory about the MSM. Obama has it in his hip pocket and they do his bidding. Their first priority is to defend his agenda and second is taking down the opposition.

In attacking Romney or putting him in a poor light, the MSM is simply fulfilling their first mission statement, which is to protect their Messiah and Obamacare by equating Romney with Romneycare and trying to prove the GOP are hypocrites. Thus the main purpose of the attacks are NOT to take down Romney. Obama knows he has taken a hit in the Congressional generic ballot so what he wants to do is to regain some of his mojo that he felt his party has lost.

But when Obama himself is politically threatened himself then the MSM avoids any talk of Romney and goes right after Palin.

That there are more favorable stories about Palin recently and fewer on Romney leads me to believe that Obama’s agenda needs shoring up more than his own personal poll numbers. Remember he is not running for reelection until 2012.

technopeasant on March 30, 2010 at 2:00 AM

To repurpose an old joke, you know who this article doesn’t benefit? Mitt Romney.

No s**t! Good god, what did Mitt ever do to Newsweek?

In attacking Romney or putting him in a poor light, the MSM is simply fulfilling their first mission statement, which is to protect their Messiah and Obamacare

I can’t believe people are responding to this like it’s real. It is speculation by Newsweek – for the specific purpose of destroying Romney. Anyone who has read Mitt’s book knows how he feels about the Obama administration.

joncoltonis on March 30, 2010 at 4:54 AM

On a related thought to the above…

…does anyone think Newsweek or other MSM cranks would take such a shining to Palin?

I highly doubt Newsweek wishes to “destroy” Romney, but rather wishes to show how “moderate” he supposedly is…sorta in the same sense many claimed McCain was.

Like that’s something the GOP wants to repeat. /s

Lockstein13 on March 30, 2010 at 4:59 AM

There’s a kind of “disconnect” between the typical sarcasm/skepticism/cynicism of Allahpundit and his “Keep Hope Alive! Yes We Can!” sentiments for Romney:

“Think of it this way: We’re roughly as close in time right now to the 2008 primaries as we are to the 2012 ones. Think how much has happened since then, and how your own political concerns have changed. Lots of time left.”

It has little´to nothing to do with “time” per se.

I’d say moreso a losing prospect.

That, and denial.

Lockstein13 on March 30, 2010 at 5:37 AM

Michigan? Governor of MICHIGAN? That was his father, George. News Week shows considerably sloppiness in this article.

{^_^}

herself on March 30, 2010 at 6:18 AM

What is more telling of this story, is that these “journalists” actually think that ObamaCare is manageable. That it is a viable program.

right2bright on March 30, 2010 at 7:08 AM

Bankrupt Massachusetts, then move on and Bankrupt the USA.

Anybody thought of the 4th amendment problems with Obozocare for really stupid bozos? The government takes control of your medical records and your tax records … Hello ACLU, you liberal stooges need to check this out. Remember what happened when the government want Limbaugh’s medical records?

tarpon on March 30, 2010 at 7:57 AM

Actually it is interesting where Bain Capital, BCIP Associates III Grand Cayman, Sankaty hedge funds and some other of Mitt’s investment vehicles are: the Grand Caymans and Bermuda. These are tax havens or tax shelters to US investors, used by many to avoid taxes in the US. Just all part of good investing at the higher level of things. He had problems while in office as Governor when he wondered why he couldn’t put taxes on off-shore accounts… while having used them successfully for years to do just that for his taxes in MA.

I expect the man to know his own finances and why he has so many off-shore accounts in the first place. Really and for true, I do.

Then there is an article in Venture Beat, and an interview in 2007 at Tech Crunch, that look at Venture Capital and fund managers for VC fund groups. It is a highly detailed and quite technical examination of the tax laws in Mitt Romney’s area of expertise, and yet his proposals for VC funding based on income of fund managers is a bit of a perplexity as it puts small time fund managers at a disadvantage if their funds lose money as they would pay taxes on any part of the fund that gains money even if the overall fund loses money. That is, from what I can trace out, what Mitt Romney thought of as a good idea for fund managers: taxing fund managers one way if their funds gain as Capital Gainis and another way on parts of the fund if the overall fund loses money in a given year because the individual part is treated as ordinary income, not Capital Gains. Even though the entire fund is treated as a Capital investment vehicle.

I have problems with that as the small time investing manager who just barely earns over the $200k income limit can get socked for an individual member of a portfolio not performing… while a multi-million dollar income manager might not feel that at all, the smaller scale manager would and be punished for picking out a bright star in an otherwise lackluster portfolio.

That stuff is even before the association of Bain, owned by Mitt Romney, with Huawei under Romney’s picked man to run the thing while campaigning and in office. Huawei is one of the nastiest of the Chinese State Owned electronics company which was, at the time, stealing 3COM technology then manufacturing knock-offs without paying royalties to 3COM. Readinig the tactics Huawei uses overseas, which goes from deals that read like the NINJA loans in the US save these are to impoverished countries using technology all the way to outright blackmail does make you wonder what kind of research Bain does when it gets in bed with Chinese State firms run by an officer of the People’s Liberation Army.

Yes, I do have some problems with Mitt Romney the big businessman… he seems like a likeable enough guy, but if he can’t figure out his own investments, his own use of the tax system, why Capital Gains need to be treated differently than ordinary income, and has folks under him willing to get in bed with some real nasty business partners from China…well…I would have extreme problems voting on him for President. But his skills are at least equal to Tim Geithner’s!

ajacksonian on March 30, 2010 at 8:13 AM

Obamacare Lead Administrator?

ONLY ONE CHOICE:

Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel………or as those who will be under Obamacare will affectionately refer to him as….”DR. DEATH

PappyD61 on March 30, 2010 at 8:34 AM

Mittens is a better advocate for Obamacare than is Maobama himself. For an out of power big government party, there probably is no better candidate than Mitt Romneycare.

Why a self described conservative party would want to be within 100 yards of Mittens is another matter. But hey, that’s why they call it the Stupid Party.

Romneycare/Bondage 2012!

james23 on March 30, 2010 at 9:11 AM

There is something really funny about this article. Can’t put my fimger on it but it may be that people sitting on the fence can’t win.

ORconservative on March 30, 2010 at 9:37 AM

Mitt needs to make the following points:
1. The Massachusetts plan was the best that could be achieved in a state with an 80% Democratic majority in the state house and senate.
2. The Massachusetts plan looked at the money already being spent on health care and used that to greatly increase coverage.
3. Experience has shown that many elements did not work as planned.
4. Taking the lessons learned from Massachusetts and the excellent suggestions made by many conservatives during this health care debate we can solve this problem without shredding the constitution or sacrificing our freedoms.

The federal government can do things we could not do in Massachusetts such as creating truly free markets, allowing insurance to be sold across state lines, allowing cafeteria style coverage where people can buy only the coverage they need, move toward catastrophic care, finally authorize MSA’s, making insurance premiums and medical bills tax deductible from the first dollar, etc.

A real health care reform package would look far different from what we have today.

Romney can acknowledge that the Massachusetts plan has many problems and indicate that he has studied the results and has learned from the experience without admitting to having made mistakes.

The Rock on March 30, 2010 at 9:48 AM

Ouch. Newsweek may be singlehandedly responsible for killing Mitt’s chances in 2012. I don’t think that’s what they were aiming for….

The last thing we need in 2012 is to elect someone who can better manage the new infrastructure the Democrats installed.

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 30, 2010 at 9:59 AM

Oy vey !

epluribusunum on March 30, 2010 at 10:52 AM

who was that one guy they put in Obama’s administration because they were “threatened” by him? Guv. of Utah, right?

deidre on March 29, 2010 at 10:09 PM

Jon Huntsman.
Former Governor of Utah.
Current Ambassador to China for Obama.

thomashton on March 30, 2010 at 11:47 AM

Obama: “And I think that’s unfortunate because when you actually look at the bill itself, it incorporates all sorts of Republican ideas. I mean, a lot of commentators have said, you know, this is sort of similar to the bill that Mitt Romney passed in Massachusetts.”

He’s your boy Allahpundit.

Romney I mean….

Lockstein13 on March 30, 2010 at 12:21 PM