Here is a bit of TRUTH about what Mitt Romney accomplished as Governor:
LINK
|
In 2002, Massachusetts' economy was rapidly deteriorating. It was ranked 50th, the second worst in the nation in its increase in unemployment. [1] Job losses were so great that although a dozen states were more populous, and California hadover 5 times as many people [2], Massachusetts lost more jobs than anywhere else in the country:
“Massachusetts is number one in the nation in job losses, shedding 4.7 percent of all jobs over the last two years. The state has lost 71,000 manufacturing jobs, or 17 percent; 69,000, or nearly 14 percent, of all jobs in the professional and business services sector; and nearly 18 percent of all jobs in the information industry.”
Boston Globe - A little perspective - Apr 25, 2003
Debt was mounting in the state government as jobs were leaving the state at such an alarming rate.
“Antitax activist Barbara Anderson recalls leaving the following message on Romney's answering machine: ''I know you're really busy now with the Olympics, but when you're finished, please come back and save Massachusetts.''
“The state party's new chairwoman, Kerry Healey, discreetly flew to Salt Lake City to gauge his intentions. He was noncommittal.”
Boston Globe - Taking office, remaining and outsider - Jun 29, 2007
“A "Draft Mitt" campaign sprouted up in the state... Ann Romney had grown to love living in Utah. (Among other reasons, she'd been found to have multiple sclerosis a few years earlier, and horseback riding in the Utah mountains was therapeutic.) And they still bore the scars of the 1994 campaign. But the forces beckoning Romney to run were too strong to resist. Nearly everyone, it seemed, wanted him.”
The Atlantic - The Holy Cow! Candidate - Sep 2005
The economic situation was so grave, that after Romney decided to run, Tim Russert (from NBC) said:
“Lets go to a very, very important issue confronting this state. It's fiscal health. This is what someone on Beacon Hill said just the other day:
''A lot of people think this has been bad. This was the warm-up! This was just spring training. There's no glimmer of economic optimism or life or confidence out there. The next governor, whoever it is, is going to have to address this aggressively.''
“ -Speaker Thomas Finnernan...
“There's a $300 million shortfall. There is a $2 billion structural deficit confronting Massachusetts. The budget is $23 billion, 40% of which is off the table because of court mandates and laws that you must provide that kind of funding. With the remaining $12 billion, you have to find $2 billion...”
|
That was in October, but by December the Boston Globe reported it got even worst:
“ "It's the worst I've seen it. Going back to the post-war era, I've never seen such an acute and focused fiscal crisis and particularly for the state government," said Richard P. Nathan, director of the Nelson Rockefeller Institute of Government at the State University of New York-Albany...
“The estimated budget gap of $547 million in Massachusetts is among the largest in total dollars, according to the report by the National Conference of State Legislatures... Massachusetts officials have predicted that in the next fiscal year the shortfall will far exceed an earlier projection of $2 billion.”
The Boston Globe - Deficits studies say crisis is worst since WWII - Dec 5, 2002
It continued to get worst. By the time Mitt Romney took office as governor of Massachusetts, the upcoming state budget for that year would have a structural deficit of nearly $3 billion if the budget was not cut. [3] Furthermore, the existing budget passed the previous year, that would be in effect for several more months, had a projected total deficit of approximately $1.2 billion [4]. He inherited about a $650 million deficit in that budget by the time he took office. [5]
Governor Romney convinced the legislature to allow him to immediately make changes to the existing budget. He immediately slashed spending and balanced that budget. [6] He then balanced each of the four annual budgets he created. He was dealing with a veto-proof legislature that was 85% democrat, but he was able to 'hold the line on all the spending that the democrats up there wanted to do.' [7] The budgets he submitted, fought for and succeeded in obtaining not only were balanced each year, but provided a surplus of $700 million in 2004, [8] nearly $1 billion in 2005 [9a],[9b],[9c] and a surplus of $700 million in 2006. He balanced the budget every year without raising taxes. [10] By the end of his term, he had taken "Massachusetts from billions in deficit to billions in surplus". [11] He turned in a $2 billion rainy day fund at the end of his term in office. [12]
The unemployment rate in Massachusetts had doubled from January 2001 to January 2003, the year Romney took office, and was continuing to increase at a fast rate. He implemented pro-growth policies and programs. By summer the increase in unemployment had stopped and by fall unemployment was dropping. [13] While Massachusetts was 50th, or nearly the worst in the nation in the increase in unemployment rates the year that just ended when he took office, he got it down to 38th place by the end of his first year in office. [14] The unemployment rate continued to rapidly drop for nearly two years, hit a plateau for about a year and a half, then started dropping again at the end of his term of office (see chart below). The year he left office (2007), the trend in Massachusetts' unemployment rate was in the top ten in the nation [15], a big improvement from the 50th place it was in the year he won office.
|
The FACTS (Click) about healthcare in Massachutetts
|
"On April 12, 2006 Governor Mitt Romney signed the health legislation.[14] He vetoed 8 sections of the health care legislation, including the controversial employer assessment.[15] Romney also vetoed provisions providing dental benefits to poor residents on the Medicaid program, and providing health coverage to senior and disabled legal immigrants not eligible for federal Medicaid.[16][17] The legislature promptly overrode six of the eight gubernatorial section vetoes, on May 4, 2006, and by mid-June 2006 had overridden the remaining two.[18]"
Don't be fooled. HealthCare in Mass was created and designed by the most Liberal Legislature, in the most Liberal State, for the most Liberal people in America. They got what they wanted . . . and it was over the VETO of Mitt Romney.
|
Rush Limbaugh attacks Romney over "Global Warming" statement. Rush should actually listen to what Romney said. It was lumping the possibility of climate change, pollution, energy, the need to become energy efficient and stop sending $700 billion to our Muslim enemies for oil.
We do cause air and water pollution. In fact we have made great strides in CLEANING UP pollution and reducing it. I live in the Dallas area. EVERY summer you can look at the TEMPERATURE MAP on the weather in the evening and SEE in the DFW METROPLEX the downtown areas are ALWAYS a couple degrees warmer because of all the MAN MADE concrete and traffic. Let's use just a bit of commonsense here. Romney made a reasonable statement and his book contains the same statement...nothing to hide here. Rush....apologize for your "alarmism."
|
FACTS ABOUT HEATHCARE IN AMERICA - STATE V. FEDERAL REGULATION - ROMNEY'S POSITION:
There is lots of misinformation out there about the HealthCare bill passed in Massachusetts with implications that Mitt Romney is in favor of a National HealthCare Plan. Nothing could be further from the truth.
FACT: Romney was a Republican governor with a very Democrat Legislature - Romney DID NOT write the bill - Romney has said that he will give all 50 states WAIVERS and will un-do ObamaCare.
FACT: Bush and every president in history have SIGNED INTO LAW things they did not like. THE VOTERS DID NOT GIVE HIM A REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE and he did not have the power to VETO BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN OVERRULED. It is that simple. Massachusetts Liberalism is why Massachusetts is in the mess it is today...just like California. Many insurance companies have CHOSEN NOT TO do business in Massachusetts because of their lack of tort reform and litigious atmosphere.
QUESTIONS: (1) Why did Romney decide not to run for Gov. again? (2) How much of what the DEMOCRAT LEGISLATURE did in Massachusetts while Romney was Gov. has been reversed? NONE! (3) Since Massachusetts voters voted in Romney as a GOP Gov and still voted in a 85% DEM Legislature, what chance did Romney have of VETOing anything they came up with? NONE!
ANSWERS: (1) He could not deal with a 85% DEM Legislature ... (2) they have reversed NOTHING ... (3) NO CHANCE ... The voters of Massachusetts tied the hands of Romney in the same way the US voters tied the hands of Bush in his last two years as President. And then naysayers blamed Bush for what the DEMS did in Congress that he had no power to prevent.
Romney is foremost a successful business man - NOT a lifelong professional politician. What political offices has he held? Just the one. How many Presidents have we had that did not hold another political office first? Who would really want a PRESIDENT with no executive experience?
Simply suggesting that you take a good look at him again. Pro- Is ra el - pro-Border Security - Integrity - Honesty - Experience in business - Experienced in government - knows Is la m is our enemy – understands where our “Inalienable Rights” came from and Who our “Creator” is - loves AMERICA!!
Romney "defends" MassHealthCare on the grounds that STATES do already REGULATE insurance. Massachusetts legislature created and presented the bill. Romney knew he would not be successful in VETOing it. Like all governors and presidents, they often have to settle for less than perfect legislation.
Insurance IS going to be REGULATED...we want it to be the 50 states rather than the Federal Govt. This allows for innovation and creativity. That is what we want. WE "FORCE" people to buy auto insurance liability to protect other people from having to pay for injuries; banks require life insurance on business owners to obtain loans to protect the bank; mortgage companies require borrowers to have insurance if their home is financed to protect the bank and stockholders; we require people to obey speed laws and all kinds of other laws to protect others. REQUIRING people to purchase health insurance is to protect others from having to pay for their medical care due to their own lack of responsibility. Time to get real in this HealthCare Debate.
Time to quit implying that Federal Regulation is the same as State Regulation. Insurance is already regulated at the state level. This is where we should want it regulated. Insurance companies will not always do what is best for "The People" in the absence of some regulation. Before falsely trashing Mitt Romney about STATE REGULATION OF INSURANCE, do some homework and realize that there MUST be some regulation of the MULTI-BILLION-DOLLAR Insurance Industry. Regulation is for the purpose recognizing that without it, there will be dishonesty and lack of responsibility by the companies and those seeking benefits."REGULATION" of Insurance Companies by the States has resulted in BILLIONS OF DOLLARS they have bilked out of policyholders over the years.
There was litigation against Prudential in 1994-95 that resulted in $Millions in fines and $2.8BILLION+ in money returned to policyholders. Millions in fines and BILLIONS in restitution have been paid by insurance companies in recent years. PRU, MET, State Farm, Allstate, Hartford ... virtually all companies. The McCarran–Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1011-1015, is a United States federal law that exempts the business of insurance from most federal regulation, including federal anti-trust laws to a limited extent. The McCarran–Ferguson Act was passed by Congress in 1945 after the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association that the federal government could regulate insurance companies under the authority of the Commerce Clause. This law is what Obama wants ignored in order to create greater centralized political and economic power in Washington.
http://www.tdi.state.tx.us/hprovider/drnews.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/06/business/prudential-insurance-pays-record-5-million-fine-for-violations-new-york-state.html
http://www.badfaithinsurance.org/reference/Life/L0265a.htm
http://www.healthinsurance.org/risk_pools/
http://www.txhealthpool.org/
|
|