Primary Election 2012: GOP Hopefuls Supported Individual Mandate, Before Coming Out Against It (VIDEO)

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has faced sharp criticism from conservatives over the health care reform package he signed into law in the Bay State during his tenure, and more specifically, the plan's inclusion of a mandate that individuals purchase health insurance.

Romney, however, is not the only Republican running for president in the next election cycle who has voiced support for the measure -- a key element of the health care law signed by President Barack Obama -- in the past only to later criticize it.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Utah governor Jon Huntsman and former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty have all spoken out in favor of the individual mandate.

Below, a look at the GOP hopefuls who supported the measure before coming out against it.

WATCH:

 

 

Comments

[Allen Reed Jensen]

02:52 PM on 06/24/2011

I read all of this weeks ago on another article here on HP. Why didn't people (on any of the networks) mention Pawlenty's hypocrisy after he coined the term "Obamneycare?" When Huntsman said during his announcement speech he never flip flopped why didn't any commentators comment on that whopper (healthcare mandate and climate change)? The same is true for Newt but they are never called on it by the rest of the press. I'm a conservative but these gaps in journalistic integrity and honesty on Fox and other conservative media makes me sick.

[liberalandloveit]

12:22 PM on 06/24/2011

Same old, same old. GOPers ridicule Dems as flip-floppers, but when GOP does it it is A-OK. Nothing to see here. Move along...

[masha2009]

11:48 AM on 06/24/2011

they are for it when they are in power or when dems are against it. but when dems give in to get something done then it becomes a left wing idea.

this libya issue? if it were a republican president in the white house, republicans would be sooo for it. look at what mitch mcconell said the other day. he basically said they oppose obama because he's a dem.

[verylargehat]

02:04 PM on 06/24/2011

They're all so disingenuous, it's nauseating.

[masha2009]

11:36 AM on 06/24/2011

this pretty much sums up republican strategy to effectively move the center to the right and to continue to foment hate for dems among their base.

[Hooponopono]

11:22 AM on 06/24/2011

The mandate flip flop is a classic example of what I call the Great American Tragedy. In Jan 2009 our new president was handed the worst mess ever handed an incoming president. If ever there was a time that cried out for, that begged for UNITY. This was it. All America should have rallied behind our new leader to work together fo pull this country out of the awful hole we were in. All should have put politics aside for the good of the country. All should have said, "I'm an American before I'm a Republican or Democrat; conservative or liberal".

Did any of you see UNITY? Hell, no. What we got was 49% of our congress lock around the idea that their job one was to make "Obama a one term president", to make him fail. And, they proceeded to push back against the president as hard as the president pushed forward. They even developed a snappy slogan...."The Party of NO". They were Republicans/conservatives first. And, the good of the country would have to take a back seat to their politics.

And, so we see things over and over like this one. The president adopted their idea...the mandate. And, as soon as he did.....they were against it.

I started this by calling this a Great American Tragedy. It was caused by Republicans being Republicans first before being patriotic Americans. And, the nation has suffered for it.

[noTinreason]

10:27 AM on 06/24/2011

These same candidates also flip-flopped on climate change and now side with the anti-science/pro-business/6,000-year-old-planet crowd

[butchcliff]

09:12 AM on 06/24/2011

Opposition for the sake of opposition, not for whats best for the people.

[peanutsintexas]

09:00 AM on 06/24/2011

Eerily similar to others in high positions, their positions are doing nothing other than EVOLVING.

[whoknew42]

08:48 AM on 06/24/2011

Is anybody surprised by this?
Because I'm not.
In fact, I expected it.

[Bueno Hombre]

06:59 AM on 06/24/2011

I believe strongly in individual rights and that the best government is the least government. I believe people make the wrong choices and have the right to fail just as they could make a decision to succeed. The problem I have is: if we are a Christian Nation and the richest, most powerful nation the world has ever known, then how should we treat our citizens who can't get jobs, children, elderly, the sick, the hungry and the homeless? During hard economic times to ignore these individuals makes us less civilized. To help these individuals means we must sacrifice. Who can justify maintaining National Parks (operated by private companies for profits) and allowing children or the elderly to go hungry, how do we justify cutting taxes for rich individuals while cutting funding to the unemployeed? How do we justify allowing the military/state department to build hospitals and schools and train individuals if foreign countries and cut education, medical care, and training in our own country? How do we justify protecting the border between Afganistan and Pakistan and leave our borders unprotected? How do we justify pushing for women's rights and justice for refugees in foreign countries and fight against gay rights, a woman's free choice, and illegal aliens in our own country? How can we fight for Religious Freedom and fight against the construction of an Islamic Mosque or a Mormon for president? Just wondering?

[MichaelRCooke]

09:22 AM on 06/24/2011

Okay, I'll try to seriously answer your question.
The main memes in play are 'private charity' vs. 'government handout'. The simple idea of welfare, that citizens can survive on hand outs from the state without working - it enrages people that do have to work for a living, especially if they work hard and still navigate the challenges of poverty personally. And that anger, it can be used to protest that that worker's tax dollars are being used to support lazy bums. And Politicians can seize upon this anger, because it can and will get them votes.

The problem is complex. Because many of the people seething with anger over their taxes supporting bums - they may be on medicare and use food stamps themselves. If not, they may go hungry regularly, themselves. Psychologically no matter how poor your own circumstances - the 'poor' and the 'bums' - are always someone ELSE.

The answer, and there is one. It is to understand that no one wants a hand out, and that a hand out is actually psychologically damaging. What people want is to earn money, then they know it is theirs, that they deserve it, and no one will debate that. The problem is not the the government isn't charitable, or that private charitable institutions can't meet the demand. It's that no one is being truly charitable at all. Because the real charity would be to give these people GOOD JOBS.

[gDogMan]

11:22 AM on 06/24/2011

People have been trained to ignore the facts;
most assistance is temporary,
most recepients of assistance are a lot like them,
most recepients are either currently employed or recently unemployed, ...
while focusing on the "welfare queen" imagery;
assistance is a life style,
recepients are nothing like them, they are "those other people", who refuse to help themselves or are otherwise unemployable, undeserving bums

[MichaelRCooke]

09:22 AM on 06/24/2011

How to do that, that's where I start talking about the virtue of big government. Because I believe in the Keynesian economic model (and it's hard to argue against, it was employed to end the Depression and it did do that, it's not conclusive that the economic model and not ww2 is ultimately responsible - but even so, that's not a reason to not try it again).

To explain, a big government means you have an independent player in the countries economy that can adjust how it interacts with the national economy to better maintain prosperity. With no strong central government, the economy is at the mercy of economic forces and there is no political solution that can have any impact.

So I think a program of guaranteed Government employment is the real compassionate program, it's also mad expensive - but that investment will create consumers that support private businesses that must expand to meet demand... it reverses the recession too! And a prosperous America is one that can better pay its debts.

[drwtsn]

11:36 PM on 06/23/2011

The mandate was originally a Republican idea. I know they want to attack Obama, but it seems like it would be simpler to admit it was their idea and attack Obama for stealing it, rather than attack him for advocating it.

[Michael Peter Smith]

08:09 PM on 06/23/2011

That's why these 4 are still in the running as folks I could conceivably vote for next year.

[LeftLeanWing]

12:32 AM on 06/24/2011

Bless Your Heart  Liver

[gbrooks]

08:07 AM on 06/24/2011

So having no principles is a good thing?

[Michael Peter Smith]

12:50 PM on 06/24/2011

A good question - do we prefer someone who is consistently stupid and evil or someone who occasionally is not?

[righton101]

07:46 PM on 06/23/2011

The King of the slogan, "I was against it, before I was for it" would be that Idiot in the White House that some people call the president ! Get a grip.

[Ravenlea]

10:48 PM on 06/23/2011

So the fact that you think Obama has changed his mind on things negates the fact that these four have completely reversed their stance? Trying to deflect from the fact that they have all changed their view doesn't change the proof offered in their own words.

[Hooponopono]

11:32 AM on 06/24/2011

Ya know, righton....the majority of the American people elected this man to be our president. He is your president as well as mine..........AMERICA SAID SO !

You can disagree with his policies all you want to.....it's a great Amreican tradition. But, to call one of the most brilliant men to ever occupy the Oval Office an idiot shows that you are hurling the insult from a huge supply of idiot.

[BIG JOHN]

07:06 PM on 06/23/2011

Flip romney, icky i'm going to steal that one and add flop plawlenty to the mix.

[ThePeacemakers]

06:58 PM on 06/23/2011

No matter what party...voters you also have the privilege of "flip-flopping".
One good flip flop deserves another.