Pawlenty’s Obamacare Purity Gets a Little Less Pure

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty has been making a show out of resisting implementation of the Affordable Care Act and the funding for states contained within. He’s not the only one, but his resistance has been noteworthy, in part, because of his presumed ambition to be the GOP nominee for president in 2012. If he does pursue the nomination, he could be up against former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, whose embrace of similar health reform at the state level could be a political liability in 2012.

Well, this week Pawlenty finally buckled, as the state opted in to a $5 billion ACA program to help insure early retirees. Loads of other organizations in Minnesota have already applied for the funding, but state workers were included on Oct. 27.

Pawlenty issued an executive order in August barring state agencies from applying for funds or grants made available by the ACA. The reason, according to the text of the executive order, was that the ACA is “a dramatic attempt to assert federal command” authorizing “unprecedented federal intrusions,” “intended to speed the transition to federally-controlled health care.” The executive order was issued to maintain the “boundary between state and federal government.”

The governor’s spokesman tells Politico that Pawlenty opted in to the early retiree program “in order to cut state spending.” That’s a worthy enough goal – and it’s one that could be achieved with the early retiree funding – but taking the funding still allows federal control over health insurance for some Minnesota state workers. So it seems that federal-state “boundary” Pawlenty was so bent on preserving is worth end-running if it helps the state’s bottom line.

(h/t Sarah Kliff of Politico)

Related Topics: aca, affordable care act, health reform, tim pawlenty, Health Care
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / White House

    Obama’s Persuasive Powers on Gay Marriage Manifest in Maryland

    When President Obama endorsed gay marriage earlier this month, the media grappled with two basic political questions: Was his personal “evolution” a case of  a politician transparently following a national trend toward accepting same-sex unions (accelerated, perhaps, by his chatty number two), and would it hurt his re-election chances by alienating socially conservative voters like black churchgoers? Sure, there was a recognition that it marked a gratifying moment for gay marriage advocates—as well as some grumbling about the President’s view that it remains a state issue, not a federal one. But by and large, there were few suggestions that one man, even the President, would shift public opinion on the issue or affect public policy. Based on a new Public Policy Polling survey out of Maryland, it seems this possibility was underestimated.

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Cherokee Zero

    Apparently, Massachusetts voters don’t mind that Elizabeth Warren foolishly identified herself as a Native American early in her academic career–it was, apparently, a case of family pride and wishful thinking about a Cherokee ancestor. That’s good. Warren may be the best public figure when it comes to explaining the depredations of the financial industry and [...]

  • bmccool

    Another grandstander who does not have the courage of his convictions. His m.o. is pathetically transparent; make a big scene as the defender of states’ rights. Then in the days just prior to the national midterms, cave-in and hope nobody is watching. That’s the kind of leadership the state of Minnesota can do without, and hopefully this profile in courage is remembered in 2012 when this clown is running for president.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    Pawlenty is a hypocrit. Just like all those politicians who voted against the stimulus but then sang of the praises of what stim money was doing in and for their states. My mother always told you can’t have your cake and eat it too; seems the GOP can do just that.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Timmy Cul-de-sac is so anonymous outside of Minnesota that people have no idea (beyond the pretty favorable coverage he gets from the Beltway) what a nothing he is.
    .
    I hope he runs with everything he has in two (one) year.

  • textee

    Under what Obamacare pimp Kate Pickert comically and predictably calls Obama’s “Affordable Care Act” my six month insurance premium increased 54% (FIFTY FREAKIN’ FOUR PERCENT!).

    During the previous three years, my insurance premiums did not increase by a single penny.

    Thank you, Obama, Pickert and every other socialist fool and useful idiot for your “affordable care”.

  • artraveler

    Congratulations to all who fought against single payer, the only way to bring down the cost of healthcare. As long as the health insurance companies are allowed to run their show and take their 30% for cost, salaries, and bonuses, the costs will go up.

    Heaven forbid that we have single payer. It will never work EXCEPT for MEDICARE.

  • gysgt213

    Its the free market textee. Obamacare didn’t take that away. Enjoy!

  • kbanginmotown

    gunny: Absolutely! Bend over and let Smith’s “Invisible Hand” do its work.

  • http://searchingforagrainofsanity.wordpress.com searchingforagrainofsanity

    It seems to me that at least a part of our “cost of health care” problem is the amount of profit the insurance companies are taking out of the system. I wonder how much the cost of health care could come down if we weren’t paying for corporate profits along with our health care.

    What we pay doctors probably needs to change too…but if we paid doctors decent middle class wages (and enough to cover school loans and liability insurance) and the stopped donating our hard earned wages to the fat cat insurance companies bottom lines I bet we would be a lot better off..

  • spob

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http%3A//thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/lawmaker-news/126619-barb-boxers-indian-tribe-take
    .
    Don’t worry Kate, Boxer’s less than pure on environmental issues and ethics. Why isnt this in the Swamp?
    .
    And really Kate, is a governor of a state supposed to forego billions from the Treasury? Minnesotans pay taxes, and so to forego federal benefits would be cutting their own throats.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Which is why this “Pawlenty issued an executive order in August barring state agencies from applying for funds or grants made available by the ACA.” was so stupid.

  • diecash1

    I don’t think what textee is feeling is Smith’s hand…………none the less, enjoy!

blog comments powered by Disqus