Today's Republican Party is....

[Dreadnaught]

It's not a moot point, it's also like saying 'they used to support it, until their opponents supported it and now they hate it'. Depends on context, of course. But it's not invalid to begin with. It's sometimes hard to take a politician seriously if he's railing against something eerily similar to something he supported not that long ago, after all. Gives reason to look at the motives for changing it, anyway. For example, if I read about the republicans supporting immigration amnesty in the past, and now oppose it, I'd like to know what their reasons for chancing were - was it actually a bad idea to begin with, or are they now just pandering votes by being tough on immigration?

GGT is referring to a specific idea (compulsory insurance) that a very few right-wing think tanks supported about 15 years ago. Several years later, a moderate governor in a left-wing state (Mitt Romney) used this idea as part of a health plan that he passed with overwhelming Democratic support in his state. The plan was pretty widely opposed by right-wingers across the US.

I don't think it's fair to say that an idea that came out of a corner of a think tank and got adopted into law by a large number of left-wingers really represents a core part of right-wing ideology.

[GGT]

GGT is referring to a specific idea (compulsory insurance) that a very few right-wing think tanks supported about 15 years ago. Several years later, a moderate governor in a left-wing state (Mitt Romney) used this idea as part of a health plan that he passed with overwhelming Democratic support in his state. The plan was pretty widely opposed by right-wingers across the US.

I don't think it's fair to say that an idea that came out of a corner of a think tank and got adopted into law by a large number of left-wingers really represents a core part of right-wing ideology.

Compulsory insurance was lauded by Republicans and conservatives for years -- to "encourage accountability and self-reliance", have people participate with "skin-in-the-game", and reduce use of public safety nets and "welfare". They believed healthcare should be treated like any other private sector business, using "Free Market Capitalism", with supply-and-demand economic theories. They even cited those reasons for why The US has the best health system in the world!

Main differences: that insurance was to remain within the for-profit, private Insurance Industry, and State legislatures would be the mandating and regulatory bodies. RomneyCare didn't pop up out of nowhere...it had been bandied about in (R) circles for decades. It sprouted from insurers trying Managed Care (HMO, PPO) to control costs, but only worked with lifetime caps and denials for pre-existing conditions, then dumping the sickest/costliest into state Medicaid pools (or SS disability, or Medicare). That's how a (R) governor with a (D) legislature came to an agreement, at the intersection between public and private.

Sorry, Dread, your selective memory gets a .