Oh my: Did Mitch Daniels support a health-care mandate in 2003?

posted at 6:38 pm on May 19, 2011 by Allahpundit

Alternate headline: “Suddenly, Newt Gingrich having only the second-worst week among major candidates.”

You know who this helps? I think you do.

An item in the South Bend Tribune from October, 23, 2003, on a campaign stop Daniels made to a health clinic, reported:

The candidate said he favors a universal health care system that would move away from employee-based health policies and make it mandatory for all Americans to have health insurance.

Daniels envisioned one scenario in which residents could certify their coverage when paying income taxes and receive a tax exemption that would cover the cost.

“We really have to have universal coverage,” Daniels said.

Under his plan, Daniels said, the nation could get away from the inefficient and unfair way in which health care is provided to those who are uninsured, many of whom end up in emergency rooms or “at clinics like this one.”

Aspiring to universal coverage is one thing, aspiring to do it via a mandate is another. (Remember how The One was anti-mandate during the 2008 campaign despite wanting to make coverage universal or near-universal? Odd how no one brings that up anymore.) Looking to torpedo Daniels right out of the gate, HuffPo conducted a “lengthy search of the governor’s various statements on health care policy” over the years; apparently, this was the only example they found of Daniels allegedly endorsing the mandate, and even here there’s no direct quote to confirm that he was actually saying what the reporter thinks he was saying. Which is surprising: After all, the mandate wasn’t nearly as radioactive on the right until ObamaCare exploded and the constitutional arguments against a free-floating Commerce Clause power of compulsory purchases began to sharpen. For instance, I don’t remember Romney’s endorsement of the mandate being a major strike against him in 2008, especially in comparison to his abortion flip-flop. You would think more Republicans would have long-ago flirtations with the idea on their records somewhere. (And of course, some do.) With Daniels, this one piece is it — so far.

Reached for comment this afternoon by NRO, his office assured them that he supports using tax credits to help people buy insurance, not mandates. Mitch the Knife himself addressed the subject in a radio interview later:

“I don’t believe in mandates,” Daniels said in a radio interview with Michael Smerconish earlier today. “We took a very, very different approach here in Indiana, more or less health saving accounts for low income people.”

Daniels added that he didn’t agree that “as a matter of either good health care policy or, frankly, our constitutional liberties, that government at any level should be ordering Americans to buy a given product.”

If he’s serious about running — and judging by this story, it sounds like he is — he’d better have staffers trawling Lexis/Nexis exhaustively for any “troubling” prior quotes on this subject. The base is already suspicious of him, I think, especially given his ostentatious support among the dreaded Republican elite, so any bombshell revelations in his past involving conservative heresies will do major damage, needless to say. You don’t suppose Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty have 10 or 20 or 1,000 people digging on him right now, do you?

Via Breitbart, here he is in 2009 (at 2:45) insisting he wouldn’t subject himself or his family to the savagery of presidential politics. In other news, he told the Indy Star today that he’ll reach a decision on whether he’s running for president by month’s end.


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

Comment pages: 1 2 3

May Obama literally hug and kiss all who supported something like his ‘mirage’ of a program.

Schadenfreude on May 19, 2011 at 6:41 PM

Ha ha ha. The clowns rule out themselves. All Sarahcuda has to dis wait and then swoop in to save the day.

promachus on May 19, 2011 at 6:42 PM

You know how he’s going to pay for it….

Mitch The VAT

with apologies to Bobby Darin

Oh, the shark, babe, has such teeth, dear
And it shows them pearly white
Just a VAT tax has old Mitch Daniels
And he keeps it, ah, out of sight
Ya know when that shark bites with his teeth, babe
Scarlet billows start to spread
G-O-P, babe, wears old Mitch Daniels
So there’s never, never a trace of RED

Now in the toilet, huh, huh,
whoo sunny morning, un huh
Lies the economy just fallin’ flat, eek
And someone’s sneakin’ ’round the White House
Could that someone be Mitch The VAT?

There’s a budget, huh, huh, down by the Potomac dontcha know
Where the deficit’s just a’draggin’ it down
Oh, that deficit is just, it’s there for the left, dear
Five’ll get ya ten old Mitch is back in town
Now d’ja hear ’bout the taxpayer? He disappeared, babe
After losin’ all his hard-earned cash
And now ole Mitch spends just like a sailor
Could it be our boy’s done somethin’ rash?

Now Maxine Waters, ho, ho, yeah, Hill’ry Clinton
Ooh, Miss Lisa Murky and Olympia Snowe
Oh, the line forms on the left, babe
Now that Mitch is back in town

I said Maxine Waters, whoa, Hill’ry Clinton
Look out to Miss Lisa Murky and Olympia Snowe
Yes, that line forms on the left, babe
Now that Mitch is back in town…..

Look out, old Mitch is back!!

Kafir on May 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

“My family are united on my decision not to run at this time. I will focus all my efforts on the good of IN and to help the R ticket”.

Schadenfreude on May 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

Teehee.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

If you buy the premise that the government should have anything whatsoever to do with the people’s dealings with doctors, then forcing the people to be insured is a no-brainer.

Buddahpundit on May 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

Never support a VAT. They want it in addition to current taxes, not in lieu of. NO taxes will ever be eliminated.

Schadenfreude on May 19, 2011 at 6:44 PM

Can those Iowa donors just do us all a favor and take a visit to Paul Ryan’s house?

cpaulus on May 19, 2011 at 6:44 PM

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261285/mitch-daniels-s-obamacare-problem-michael-f-cannon

Daniels’s decision to accept Obamacare funds and move forward with implementation is further undermining the repeal effort. Yesterday, federal judge Roger Vinson reversed his initial order forbidding the Obama administration to implement the law. He did so in part because plaintiff states such as Indiana are implementing it, which he said “undercut” their own argument that he should block it.

sharrukin on May 19, 2011 at 6:45 PM

The so-called smartest candidates in the room, eh? Mensa is the Spanish word for stupid.

Terrie on May 19, 2011 at 6:45 PM

Ha ha ha. The clowns rule out themselves. All Sarahcuda has to dis wait and then swoop in to save the day.

promachus on May 19, 2011 at 6:42 PM

which is why they tried so hard to destory her before the primaries. Next to these idiots Palin stands out like babe Ruth next to a a T-baller.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 6:46 PM

Second look at Pawlenty?
/DC-NYC GOP All Stars

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 6:46 PM

And Perry steps up to the plate.

IR-MN on May 19, 2011 at 6:47 PM

Buddahpundit on May 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

i thing we refer to that as the slippery slope and a prime example on why dem lite doesn’t work.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 6:48 PM

The GOP Harbor is getting filled with the Glass bottom hulls of broken Candidates who have blown themselves up.

The USS Palin seems to have the strongest Hull.

portlandon on May 19, 2011 at 6:48 PM

Kafir on May 19, 2011 at 6:43 PM

Very nice..

It would seem that the media is crossing off our squishy candidates for us. VAT, AAI honors, and now this.
Your wife called, Mitch. She said no.

HornetSting on May 19, 2011 at 6:49 PM

The base is already suspicious of him, I think, especially given his ostentatious support among the dreaded Republican elite, so any bombshell revelations in his past involving conservative heresies will do major damage, needless to say.

“Suspicious”? If around here at HA is any indication, it’s far more than that. I still ardently support Daniels, as he’s our best chance next year to beat The One. So call me an “elitist”.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 6:49 PM

November 21, 2006:

Hoosier Tax-and-Spender
Posted by Michael F. Cannon

Indiana Republican Mitch Daniels received a grade of ‘D’ in Cato’s most recent governors report card, which grades the 50 governors on their record of cutting taxes and spending. I’ve just returned from a briefing on a new health care proposal that Gov. Daniels has put together, and it doesn’t seem that he wants to improve his grade.

The Daniels proposal would:

1.Increase cigarette taxes by 25 cents per pack,
2.Use those funds to “pull down” additional federal Medicaid dollars (federal matching funds allow Indiana to almost triple their money), and then
3.Offer new government subsidies to every able-bodied adult under 200 percent of poverty.
In addition, it would have the state fund a health savings account (HSA) for each enrollee, and if an enrollee receives the recommended preventive care and does not touch their HSA funds (preventive care is 100 percent covered), at the end of the year an enrollee could withdraw $600 from their HSA to spend, say, on a color TV. If he instead leaves that taxpayer subsidy in his HSA, he gets to roll it over and let it grow. I’ve argued in a number of places that HSAs are not the solution to Medicaid, in part because they would resurrect within that program the same dependence problems that we tried so hard to kill in AFDC.

Gov. Daniels is not proposing an entitlement, and participants would have to pay for a portion of their premium. But those and other provisions (e.g., the income cutoff, the mandated benefits package, etc.) would be subject to revision on their way through the state house and by subsequent governors and legislators. Pretty soon, it would be an entitlement, the participants’ contribution would be smaller, the HSA cash subsidies would be greater, the income cutoff would be increased, and the benefits package expanded. How can I be so sure? Because Indiana can do all these things and the feds will pick up two-thirds of the tab. And heck, if this is a Republican proposal, where is the opposition going to come from?

As I told the Gov. Daniels’ loyal foot soldiers, someone needs to shove this proposal in a drawer. There is nothing worth saving.

Where do Republicans keep coming up with these tax-and-spend health care ideas? The party needs a health care revival, particularly when it comes to Medicaid.

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 6:50 PM

And Perry steps up to the plate.

IR-MN on May 19, 2011 at 6:47 PM

AMEN. Perry’s best buddy was at a wedding today – Track got hitched! The Palin, not a truck.

Marcus on May 19, 2011 at 6:53 PM

In other news, he told the Indy Star today that he’ll reach a decision on whether he’s running for president by month’s end.

oh pins and needles…pins and needles….yawn…

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 6:53 PM

Suspicious”? If around here at HA is any indication, it’s far more than that. I still ardently support Daniels, as he’s our best chance next year to beat The One. So call me an “elitist”.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 6:49 PM

Charlie. Crist.

HornetSting on May 19, 2011 at 6:53 PM

this was the only example they [HuffPo] found of Daniels allegedly endorsing the mandate…

Can I be like the Palinistas and say “They’re afraid of Daniels”? And fer cripes sake, they have to go back 8 years to get it. This shouldn’t affect Mitch one bit. It ain’t RomneyCare.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Charlie. Crist.

HornetSting on May 19, 2011 at 6:53 PM

*flashes HornetSting a steely-eyed glare*

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 6:57 PM

Can I be like the Palinistas and say “They’re afraid of Daniels”? And fer cripes sake, they have to go back 8 years to get it. This shouldn’t affect Mitch one bit. It ain’t RomneyCare.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Don’t make this about Palin or her supporters.

Defend Mitch Daniels.

Defend him.

portlandon on May 19, 2011 at 6:57 PM

Calling Michele, Sarah and Herman… “save us”

knob on May 19, 2011 at 6:59 PM

so any bombshell revelations in his past involving conservative heresies will do major damage, needless to say.

You mean like his support of the Missouri Plan and an appointment of a Soros funded SC judge?

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:00 PM

Next to these idiots Palin stands out like Babe Ruth next to a a T-baller.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 6:46 PM

Actually, more like Virnett “Jackie” Mitchell.

Fallon on May 19, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Is it really a secret that some Republicans supported health insurance mandates previously due to the fact that it shoveled new customers to the health insurance companies? The only thing that changed over the years is that the Democrats took over power in 2008 and were determined to do something major about health care. Obama and the dreamers wanted universal health care, but settled for the only thing they could politically attain: the individual mandate.

I’m not sure that Republicans ever previously supported a federal mandate to buy insurance, but anyone who doesn’t know that this comes from wanting to put money into the insurance companies’ pockets is either naïve or uninformed.

Seixon on May 19, 2011 at 7:01 PM

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Oh i’m sure this is coming from the mitt buttboy squad it is what they do. they really are not nice people.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Don’t make this about Palin or her supporters.

Defend Mitch Daniels.

Defend him.

portlandon on May 19, 2011 at 6:57 PM

o_0

I did…this is a total non-issue IMHO. Look at the man’s record as governor. That speaks for itself.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:03 PM

And Perry steps up to the plate.

IR-MN on May 19, 2011 at 6:47 PM

Let’s check out PERRY’s support of AL GORE before we get orgasmic over Perry.

stenwin77 on May 19, 2011 at 7:03 PM

Actually, more like Virnett “Jackie” Mitchell.

Fallon on May 19, 2011 at 7:01 PM</blockquotecool story. neve rheard of it before or her. thanks for the head's up

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:03 PM

JetBoy, between this and the kind of judge he appoints (you know, the one that flat out guaranteed a police state in Indiana this week), I would rather crawl over salt-dipped ground glass than vote for him. You can defend against your enemies; false friends like Daniels are far worse.

SDN on May 19, 2011 at 7:04 PM

Never support a VAT. They want it in addition to current taxes, not in lieu of. NO taxes will ever be eliminated.

Schadenfreude on May 19, 2011 at 6:44 PM

Additionally, it’s nearly impossible to organize a tax revolt against a VAT/Sales Tax.

elfman on May 19, 2011 at 7:05 PM

but settled for the only thing they could politically attain: the individual mandate.

I’m not sure that Republicans ever previously supported a federal mandate to buy insurance, but anyone who doesn’t know that this comes from wanting to put money into the insurance companies’ pockets is either naïve or uninformed.

Seixon on May 19, 2011 at 7:01 PM

this is also why the GOP house have not defunded Obamacare yet. they like and support it. they just don’t want their name on the bill.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:05 PM

Charlie. Crist.

HornetSting on May 19, 2011 at 6:53 PM
*flashes HornetSting a steely-eyed glare*

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 6:57 PM

I’ll give you another name, JB.

Judge Steven David

HornetSting on May 19, 2011 at 7:06 PM

Sounds like he said if you got insurance you’d get a tax break. Didn’t sound like he said if you don’t get insurance we’ll tax you

angryed on May 19, 2011 at 7:06 PM

I did…this is a total non-issue IMHO. Look at the man’s record as governor. That speaks for itself.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:03 PM

We are looking at his record, and it does speak for itself. Perhaps we are just hearing different things.

sharrukin on May 19, 2011 at 7:08 PM

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone and another one gone
Another one bites the dust hey
She’s gonna get you too
Another one bites the dust

idesign on May 19, 2011 at 7:08 PM

Well guys it’s becoming clear if you want Obamacare repealed vote for Palin.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:09 PM

I did…this is a total non-issue IMHO. Look at the man’s record as governor. That speaks for itself.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:03 PM

Okay, here are some other non-issues from his record as governor:

Indiana Republican Mitch Daniels received a grade of ‘D’ in Cato’s most recent governors report card, which grades the 50 governors on their record of cutting taxes and spending. I’ve just returned from a briefing on a new health care proposal that Gov. Daniels has put together, and it doesn’t seem that he wants to improve his grade.

The Daniels proposal would:

1.Increase cigarette taxes by 25 cents per pack,
2.Use those funds to “pull down” additional federal Medicaid dollars (federal matching funds allow Indiana to almost triple their money), and then
3.Offer new government subsidies to every able-bodied adult under 200 percent of poverty.

In addition, it would have the state fund a health savings account (HSA) for each enrollee, and if an enrollee receives the recommended preventive care and does not touch their HSA funds (preventive care is 100 percent covered), at the end of the year an enrollee could withdraw $600 from their HSA to spend, say, on a color TV. If he instead leaves that taxpayer subsidy in his HSA, he gets to roll it over and let it grow. I’ve argued in a number of places that HSAs are not the solution to Medicaid, in part because they would resurrect within that program the same dependence problems that we tried so hard to kill in AFDC.

Gov. Daniels is not proposing an entitlement, and participants would have to pay for a portion of their premium. But those and other provisions (e.g., the income cutoff, the mandated benefits package, etc.) would be subject to revision on their way through the state house and by subsequent governors and legislators. Pretty soon, it would be an entitlement, the participants’ contribution would be smaller, the HSA cash subsidies would be greater, the income cutoff would be increased, and the benefits package expanded. How can I be so sure? Because Indiana can do all these things and the feds will pick up two-thirds of the tab. And heck, if this is a Republican proposal, where is the opposition going to come from?

As I told the Gov. Daniels’ loyal foot soldiers, someone needs to shove this proposal in a drawer. There is nothing worth saving.

Where do Republicans keep coming up with these tax-and-spend health care ideas? The party needs a health care revival, particularly when it comes to Medicaid.

Care to defend that?

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 7:10 PM

o_0

I did…this is a total non-issue IMHO. Look at the man’s record as governor. That speaks for itself.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:03 PM

So you’re OK if he vocally supports “universal coverage” as long as he is lying to you?

Pattosensei on May 19, 2011 at 7:12 PM

So, Huffpo finds some vague remark from 2003 and the haters come out to play. That’s cool, enjoy your 2 minutes.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:13 PM

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 7:10 PM

I don’t give much credence to CATO grades…they’re libertarian, and give low “grades” to many solid conservatives.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:15 PM

“We really have to have universal coverage,” Daniels said.
Under his plan, Daniels said, the nation could get away from the inefficient and unfair way in which health care is provided to those who are uninsured, many of whom end up in emergency rooms or “at clinics like this one.”

Direct quotes…hmmm.

HornetSting on May 19, 2011 at 7:15 PM

Care to defend that?

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 7:10 PM

So Daniels is not a very long term thinker is he?

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:16 PM

Where is the ABP crowd to tell us no other candidate would get Palinized like she has?

They’re gonna just keep picking them off one after one until the last grizzly is standing.

NoLeftTurn on May 19, 2011 at 7:16 PM

So, Huffpo finds some vague remark from 2003 and the haters come out to play. That’s cool, enjoy your 2 minutes.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:13 PM

That’s pretty much it.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:16 PM

That’s pretty much it.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:16 PM

So, Huffpo finds some vague remark from 2003 and the haters come out to play. That’s cool, enjoy your 2 minutes.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Its National Review who came out with it. Huff and Puff and just running with it because they see Daniels as an easy kill. Which of course he is.

sharrukin on May 19, 2011 at 7:19 PM

Can I be like the Palinistas and say “They’re afraid of Daniels”? And fer cripes sake, they have to go back 8 years to get it. This shouldn’t affect Mitch one bit. It ain’t RomneyCare.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 6:56 PM

I’m sorry JetBoy, you know I’m just trying to figure things out… but I’m going to rip your boy a bit now… I haven’t commit yet I’m looking at everyone. I just realized this today.

No it isn’t Romneycare, but it is a negative. Healthcare is just one issue.

However, the economy is the issue.

How can we properly pin the economy on Obama if we pick Bush’s budget director to run against him?

Obama can just point to him and say, “He started it!”

Obama could make the case that blame for the economy is shared by Obama and Daniels/Bush.

It really undermines our whole case against Obama on the economy. I brushed over that little fact, then it hit me… hey, this isn’t a harmless fact!

So far Daniels has said, “pay attention to my record as governor”… and that is a point.

But Obama isn’t going to do that. Blaming Bush gets him off the hook to some extent, he will love sharing the blame.

Daniels is going to be left defending Bush’s monetary polices for his whole term not just Daniel’s few years.

petunia on May 19, 2011 at 7:20 PM

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:15 PM

It was also given for a single year (his 2nd IIRC) and as CATO explains is based on data that is significantly affected by the legislature’s actions, not just the governor’s. Patton posts that tired laundry list on all Daniel’s threads. It doesn’t matter how discredited the claims are.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:20 PM

The media keeps on telling me that only Daniels can really save us so I guess I’ll just keep holding out for him.

kringeesmom on May 19, 2011 at 7:21 PM

I’m gonna hold an opinion on this. I’m not a fan of mandates, but if true, that the reporter is reporting what they thought they heard….then this really is a non issue. I don’t want to tank anyone before the facts come out.

capejasmine on May 19, 2011 at 7:21 PM

I don’t give much credence to CATO grades…they’re libertarian, and give low “grades” to many solid conservatives.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:15 PM

So what about Daniels’ scheme to sponge off the Feds? What about the tax hikes he used to “pay for” the Healthy Indiana Plan? What about Indiana subsidizing health care for people up to 200% of the poverty line? What about his proposal to let them withdraw unused subsidy money from the government HSAs at the end of each year to spend on whatever the heck they feel like? What about the dependency issues?

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Where is the ABP crowd to tell us no other candidate would get Palinized like she has?

They’re gonna just keep picking them off one after one until the last grizzly is standing.

NoLeftTurn on May 19, 2011 at 7:16 PM

It seems the candidates in question are doing the job for them.

HornetSting on May 19, 2011 at 7:21 PM

The base is already suspicious of him, I think, especially given his ostentatious support among the dreaded Republican elite, so any bombshell revelations in his past involving conservative heresies will do major damage

Like appointing a Indiana Supreme Court Justice who thinks Amendment IV isn’t necessary in this day an age? (Too bad SCOTUS agrees.)

“Not a dime’s worth of difference.”

Rae on May 19, 2011 at 7:22 PM

Just to clarify….Mitch Daniels latest CATO Rating is B…not D.

Here’s the link

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/PA668.pdf

r keller on May 19, 2011 at 7:22 PM

sharrukin on May 19, 2011 at 7:19 PM

I could care less if William F. Buckley rose from his grave and tweeted it, aside from being hate fodder for you, it is meaningless.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:23 PM

I’m getting a little tired of the “he said t his 10 years ago, therefore he is no longer a viable candidate” reaction.

John McCain was once upon a time a rock solid conservative. If you search long enough you’ll find some great quotes from him affirming his conservative cred. And what did that get you in 2008?

Let’s concentrate on the actions of candidates over the past few years and not get so hung up on a quote from long agoo. I’m not saying Daniels is necessarily the guy for the nominee. But I’m not going to throw him overboard because of something he said 8 years ago.

angryed on May 19, 2011 at 7:23 PM

But I’m not going to throw him overboard because of something he said 8 years ago.

angryed on May 19, 2011 at 7:23 PM

Yes it is a different world in many ways.

petunia on May 19, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Everyone has skeletons in their closets but there’s only one potental candidate that has has their doors flung wide open already…

thebrokenrattle on May 19, 2011 at 7:26 PM

They’re gonna just keep picking them off one after one until the last grizzly is standing.

NoLeftTurn on May 19, 2011 at 7:16 PM

And I for one will be damned if I lift a finger to defend them.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:26 PM

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:23 PM

I didn’t think you did care which is why I was pointing out that your defense was a say anything to cover for him. You would vote for Obama if he was running as a Republican.

sharrukin on May 19, 2011 at 7:27 PM

Perry/West 2012…!

Seven Percent Solution on May 19, 2011 at 7:28 PM

I think the Bush wing should just split from the party and form their own little click. They could call themselves the Lesser evil or Hamilton conservatives or maybe just Royal party.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:29 PM

sharrukin on May 19, 2011 at 7:27 PM

As I said, enjoy, your 2 minutes.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:29 PM

Wow if the media goes back to 2003 to get one little statement I bet Cheri Daniels is crapping her pants right now wondering how far they will go back for some real dirt.

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Oh my, he sounds and looks democRAT lite to me.
There is no way I’d vote for ANOTHER democrat dressed like a republican again..

mmcnamer1 on May 19, 2011 at 7:31 PM

Oh my: Did Mitch Daniels support a health-care mandate in 2003?

This isn’t even newsworthy, at this point. We get it: If a Republican proposes it, it’s a cutting edge, personal-responsibility-oriented solution to our health care problems. If a Dem passes it, it’s FASCISM.

crr6 on May 19, 2011 at 7:32 PM

“The base is already suspicious of him…”

You bet we are, and for good reason. “Mitch the knife” has been given the imprimitur of The Bush Dynasty. Thus begging the question: ‘Who will he use the knife on, the budget or conservatives?’ Kings named George have stuck it to freedom loving American conservatives three times already. I don’t trust anyone that receives their blessings.

JimP on May 19, 2011 at 7:33 PM

As I said, enjoy, your 2 minutes.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:29 PM

oh wow nothing like stealing Palinista’s talking points to defend your guy. Here is a tip you all haven’t seen hate yet. this is just spitting in the wind. what till the trolls and liberals think Daniels is a threat to their One and only god. then you will see the 2 min hate and after that Daniels who has no connection to his supporters, no strong base to fight for him and defend him will be curled up in a corner in a fetal positon crying “please mommy make it stop!”

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 7:34 PM

We get it: If a Republican proposes it, it’s a cutting edge, personal-responsibility-oriented solution to our health care problems.

Which is why so many here are supporting his position… oh wait? /

If a Dem passes it, it’s FASCISM.

crr6 on May 19, 2011 at 7:32 PM

Most of us are against it regardless of who proposed it you leftist hack.

sharrukin on May 19, 2011 at 7:35 PM

his office assured them that he supports using tax credits to help people buy insurance, not mandates.

My husband & I are self-employed, small business. We pay for our own health insurance. It is our 2nd highest monthly expense. Only the mortgage is more costly. I would do back-flips for a tax credit. So I’m going to take Daniels at his current word. Could be moving to the top of the list.

humdinger on May 19, 2011 at 7:36 PM

This isn’t even newsworthy, at this point. We get it: If a Republican proposes it, it’s a cutting edge, personal-responsibility-oriented solution to our health care problems. If a Dem passes it, it’s FASCISM.

crr6 on May 19, 2011 at 7:32 PM

We work to OUST our leaders that suggest such ideas…your party CELEBRATES them, dummy.

HornetSting on May 19, 2011 at 7:37 PM

I did…this is a total non-issue IMHO. Look at the man’s record as governor. That speaks for itself.

JetBoy on May 19, 2011 at 7:03 PM

We are looking at the man’s record. ANd so far it’s not looking very good.

promachus on May 19, 2011 at 7:37 PM

Yikes….Pawlenty is looking better and better.

therightwinger on May 19, 2011 at 7:41 PM

You know who this helps?

Whatever non-establishment conservative candidate is standing at the end.

pseudoforce on May 19, 2011 at 7:42 PM

We are looking at the man’s record. ANd so far it’s not looking very good.

promachus on May 19, 2011 at 7:37 PM

LOL! Good one. Look, if you want to hate, go ahead. But please spare us the “just the facts ma’am” pretense. Someone found a chicken bone from a dinner party 8 years ago. Fine, but to run around claiming you found a skeleton in his closet is not the act of some impartial observer.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:43 PM

This isn’t even newsworthy, at this point. We get it: If, [according to Romney and Daniels supporters] a Republican Romney or Daniels proposes it, it’s a cutting edge, personal-responsibility-oriented solution to our health care problems. If a Dem passes it, it’s FASCISM.

crr6 on May 19, 2011 at 7:32 PM

More accurate.

pseudoforce on May 19, 2011 at 7:51 PM

LOL! Good one. Look, if you want to hate, go ahead. But please spare us the “just the facts ma’am” pretense. Someone found a chicken bone from a dinner party 8 years ago. Fine, but to run around claiming you found a skeleton in his closet is not the act of some impartial observer.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:43 PM

So I take it you agree with Daniels on:
* Value-added taxes and income taxes are a match made in Heaven.
* Slapping huge tariffs on imported oil would solve the energy crisis.
* The Missouri Plan is a wonderful thing, especially when it allows a Governor to appoint a Soros-supported, terrorist-defending lawyer.
* It’s just dandy for the Federal government (i.e., taxpayers) to pay for Indiana’s unsustainable healthcare scheme.
* Raises all kinds of taxes and fees and selling off highways is the way to balance budgets (deep spending cuts are unnecessary).
* Spenthrift George W. Bush’s OMB director would have an awesome fundraising “letterhead”
* It is incumbent upon Republicans to only pursue issues that won’t piss the Democrats off too much.
* Social issues matter not.
* Right-to-work laws aren’t all that important.

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 7:51 PM

Gee, and hear I thought the media was supposed to be in love with the guy and shilling for him and all that.

Mitch Daniels gave state employees the choice of paying more for their health insurance or going with Health Savings Accounts, which a lot of them did.

In the state he offered a program in which certain hoosiers {if the qualify} can get private insurance with help from the state. It is kind of like the program Ryan is talking about.

But as Governor, Daniels has not shown inclination toward creating a mandatory insurance program..that does not mean that he does not think it would be a good idea for most people to have coverage. I think most people feel that way.

There will be all kinds of stuff taken out of context to damage all of these possible candidates. The media has been doing to Palin for years. They did it to Bush too. It is to be expected.

Terrye on May 19, 2011 at 7:54 PM

I don’t know much about Mitch Daniels, other than his wife Cheri is a total basket case. Bigger basket case than Michelle Obama. He did marry Cheri twice, for some reason!? Where do Republicans come up with these candidates…Trump’s School of Politics?

Karmi on May 19, 2011 at 7:56 PM

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 7:51 PM

Every point on that list is a gross distortion of the record. Sorry, but I’m not about to spend the rest of my evening debunking all of this. As I see it, if Daniels throws his hat in the ring he’ll set the record straight. I’ll just say that I like what I’ve seen of his performance and I truly hope that he decides to run.

Now go back to your regularly scheduled hate fest.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:56 PM

, this was the only example they found of Daniels allegedly endorsing the mandate, and even here there’s no direct quote to confirm that he was actually saying what the reporter thinks he was saying. Which is surprising: After all, the mandate wasn’t nearly as radioactive on the right until ObamaCare exploded and the constitutional arguments against a free-floating Commerce Clause power of compulsory purchases began to sharpen.

This is an important point to remember.

Let’s not revise history and act as if it was ALWAYS the platform of the right to oppose all forms of universal health-care, even health-care via mandate. Opposition to it didn’t really firm up until the Obamacare disaster began.

In a similar vein, this is why I think the criticisms against Pawlenty for his earlier support of “cap and trade” are somewhat disingenuous, because at the time he supported them, there wasn’t such a furious opposition against green policies from the right. That didn’t really come until the green policies started to be implemented (here and around the world) and we saw how much of a debacle they were creating.

Vyce on May 19, 2011 at 7:57 PM

As I said, enjoy, your 2 minutes.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:29 PM

I feel your pain.

katy the mean old lady on May 19, 2011 at 7:58 PM

Karmi on May 19, 2011 at 7:56 PM

Nancy Reagan was no day at the beach either.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:59 PM

Bachmann and Palin are the only ones with integrity. I believe them when they speak. All the rest, not so much…

adamsmith on May 19, 2011 at 8:00 PM

Terrye on May 19, 2011 at 7:54 PM

this wasn’t the media. This was Mitt’s buttboys trying to stop Daniels form getting in the race. I doubt it works…

unseen on May 19, 2011 at 8:01 PM

Let’s not revise history and act as if it was ALWAYS the platform of the right to oppose all forms of universal health-care, even health-care via mandate. Opposition to it didn’t really firm up until the Obamacare disaster began.

In a similar vein, this is why I think the criticisms against Pawlenty for his earlier support of “cap and trade” are somewhat disingenuous, because at the time he supported them, there wasn’t such a furious opposition against green policies from the right. That didn’t really come until the green policies started to be implemented (here and around the world) and we saw how much of a debacle they were creating.

Vyce on May 19, 2011 at 7:57 PM

That’s all very nice, but try running against Obama and the Democrats by drawing some sharp distinctions using that sort of reasoning. The result would be a big win for Obama.

pseudoforce on May 19, 2011 at 8:09 PM

Every point on that list is a gross distortion of the record. Sorry, but I’m not about to spend the rest of my evening debunking all of this.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 7:56 PM

Then how about debunking one or two?

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 8:11 PM

Where is the ABP crowd to tell us no other candidate would get Palinized like she has?

NoLeftTurn on May 19, 2011 at 7:16 PM

“Palinized”? Heck, all that has to be done is trot out quotes. These are just the preliminaries.

pseudoforce on May 19, 2011 at 8:13 PM

* Value-added taxes and income taxes are a match made in Heaven.

Daniels recited from Kahn’s book: “It would be most useful to redesign the tax system to discourage consumption and encourage savings and investment. One obvious possibility is a value added tax and flat income tax, with the only exception being a lower standard deduction.”

“That might suit our current situation pretty well,” said Daniels, who served as George W. Bush’s Office of Management and Budget director and was a senior adviser in Ronald Reagan’s White House. “It also might fit Bill Simon’s line in the late ‘70s that the nation should have a tax system that looks like someone designed it on purpose.”

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 8:15 PM

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 8:11 PM

First off because this thread is about hating on Mitch for something he said 8 years ago on the campaign trail. Second, because no matter how thoroughly I debunk it, like Patton there you’ll just reflexively paste it again the next his name is mentioned and demand we go through the same useless cycle again. Third, I don’t like you and have no desire to waste time arguing with someone I have so little respect for.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 8:16 PM

* Slapping huge tariffs on imported oil would solve the energy crisis.

Daniels also suggested support for increasing gasoline taxes. Kahn wrote, in a passage Daniels read from Thursday, “One fully justifiable tax would be on imported oil. Any large importation of oil by the U.S. raises security problems. There are, in effect, external costs associated with importing oil that a tariff would internalize.

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 8:16 PM

* The Missouri Plan is a wonderful thing, especially when it allows a Governor to appoint a Soros-supported, terrorist-defending lawyer.

The single most important judicial issue in Indiana is the ongoing debate over the state’s method for appointing appellate judges. It’s not much of a debate, actually, thanks in part to Daniels. Indiana uses a form of the Missouri Plan, the commission-based method for choosing judges that was designed by Progressive Era lawyers to put “experts” in charge of judicial selection. The “experts,” of course, are lawyers. When the issue was in front of Daniels he took the worst possible approach. In 2009, overwhelming majorities of the Indiana General Assembly (88–3 in the House, 35–15 in the Senate) approved legislation to kill that method in parts of Indiana. Governor Daniels vetoed it and said:

The current method of selecting judges for the St. Joseph Superior Court has prevailed successfully for 35 years. It is a model to be emulated, not discarded. It is not broken; it requires no repair.

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 8:20 PM

Second, because no matter how thoroughly I debunk it, like Patton there you’ll just reflexively paste it again the next his name is mentioned and demand we go through the same useless cycle again.

MJBrutus on May 19, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Now you know the life of a Palinista. Turnabout is fair play, bud.

pseudoforce on May 19, 2011 at 8:21 PM

* The Missouri Plan is a wonderful thing, especially when it allows a Governor to appoint a Soros-supported, terrorist-defending lawyer.

David is a former chief defense counsel for detainees at Guantanamo Bay who praised the majority opinion in Boumediene v. Bush with this trite quote: “The most important thing that Boumediene held is something that I always thought was obvious … that in America, there are no law-free zones.” Or maybe he could explain why the official Steven David bio released by his office announced the fact that David is a member of the American Judicature Society, the leading institutional proponent of the Missouri Plan, and beneficiary of more than $1 million in contributions from George Soros’s Open Society Institute since 2000. Daniels may well have chosen the least bad option presented to him by the commission, but that cannot excuse him supporting a system that ties the governor’s hands to such an extent that he can only choose the least offensive of three liberal nominees.

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 8:23 PM

Herman Cain is going to wind up taking it…he’s the only guy so far that doesn’t end up sounding like a RINO squish.

AUINSC on May 19, 2011 at 8:24 PM

* It’s just dandy for the Federal government (i.e., taxpayers) to pay for Indiana’s unsustainable healthcare scheme.

Also like Obamacare, HIP is fiscally unsound and pushes states’ Medicaid costs onto federal taxpayers. Every $1 Indiana spends on HIP triggers at least $2 of spending by the federal government; no matter what state you call home, you’re paying for Mitch Daniels’s government-run health-care plan.

steebo77 on May 19, 2011 at 8:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3