Shock! Romney using double-speak on health care.

When does a ban on preexisting medical conditions in healthcare insurance become an example of government out of control?  When Mitt says so.

When does a ban on preexisting medical conditions in healthcare insurance become an example of free enterprise at work?  When Mitt says so.

When does a tax benefit for individuals and small businesses who buy healthcare insurance on the open market via exchanges become an example of government-controlled healthcare?  When Mitt says so.

When does a tax benefit for individuals and small businesses who buy healthcare insurance on the open market via exchanges become an example of free enterprise at work? When Mitt says so.

I think you're getting the point here.  Mitt rails on Obama's ACA, but then comes right back and says that the same things that are in ACA are the sort of things he'd put forward in his version of national healthcare reform.

There are notable differences:

• He'd get rid of the mandatory buy-in.  That's fine with me, but then the cost savings advantage that was supposed to be created from everyone buying in, now goes away and because Mitt is in favor of granting tax breaks for all who qualify, to buy insurance, and that puts the federal government into a deeper hole, driven by a purported fiscal hawk.
• He'd also give block grants to states, and force them to deal with cuts to Medicaid.  Depending upon how a Republican Congress and President decided how they'd change the way Medicaid dollars are handed out to states, some states may end up net losers while others net winners.  Also, since he'd cap Medicaid, states would be on the hook for rationing healthcare if the number of recipients grows because of a bad economy.  Sticking it to the states -- that's an odd position for a purported Conservative to take.
• ACA caps FSA ceilings while Mitt would expand it.  Let me tell you, FSAs are useless when you don't work for a company, because a company is the administrator of an FSA.  Expanding FSA limits gives people with those exotic thousands of dollars a month plans a major tax break to avoid paying taxes, as opposed to the self-employed.

His rhetoric ends with a trite flourish, stating that government-run health care is more expensive.  But it's absolutely, positively, without a doubt, FALSE.  And anyway, Mitt's version of cost-containment, is to force the states to do the rationing that he doesn't want to deal with, politically.

Tough luck for states, especially high-poverty states, ironically, like Texas and Alabama.  No wait, maybe this is a good thing.  Make those high-poverty Red States pay and ration their own problems, right?