The putative republican nominee (according to the inside the beltway free cocktail weenie circuit), yesterday:
Mitt Romney (r): ….It also means that if you don’t like what they do you can fire them. I like being able to fire people that provide services to me. If, if, if I, you know, if someone doesn’t give me the good service I need I want to, I want to say, you know, that, that, I’m gonna go get somebody else to provide that service to me. And, and so that’s one thing I’d change….
It was about health insurance:
Posted at 03:13 PM ET, 01/09/2012
Romney: ‘I like being able to fire people who provide services to me’
By Philip Rucker….Romney’s comment came in response to a question about health-care policy before more than 300 area business leaders. The former Massachusetts governor was referring to being able to change insurance companies….
Mitt Romney (r) caught a lot of flack for his statement. Here’s the real problem with it:
More Choices, Better Coverage: Health Insurance Reform for Rural America [pdf]
….And in many rural states, one insurance company dominates more than 80 percent of the market, meaning that families are often limited to a choice between only one or two insurers. As a result, some rural residents are unable to purchase a health insurance plan that is right for them….
[footnote] American Medical Association. (2008,2009). “Competition in health insurance: A comprehensive study of U.S. Markets: 2008 Update,” American Medical Association.
“….If, if, if I, you know, if someone doesn’t give me the good service I need I want to, I want to say, you know, that, that, I’m gonna go get somebody else to provide that service to me….”
Who do you “fire” when you only have one choice? A multimillionaire with the resources, the ability to travel, and multiple homes across the country would have plenty of choices. Those with far fewer resources, not so much.
It’s not a really difficult trick to understand that difference.
Then again, if a corporation is a person one could suppose it could be “fired”.
Charlie Pearce just made the same point you did Mike.
Romney, a son of great privilege, has no idea what it means to live one pay check away from financial disaster.
The “freedom” that he wants to protect is only a freedom available to someone of his great wealth.
The Democrats have to make this a key part of the reason why Romney must never become President.