RomneyCare, conservatives, and the individual mandate...

TNR:

The right's ire has focused on the individual mandate. I understand why that offends Republicans who don't like the government telling people what to do. But plenty of conservatives don't have such libertarian leanings; that's why they were the ones who first proposed, and for many years, supported the individual mandate. 

As any expert will tell you, if you want to make sure everybody has at least basic insurance, at a reasonable price, and you want to do it primarily through private coverage, the individual mandate is essential. So unless you oppose the mandate from the left--that is, you prefer people get coverage from some kind of public insurance--to oppose the mandate is to oppose the idea that people with high medical risks deserve access to the same insurance, at the same price, as people who are healthy. I know that's how a lot of conservatives feel. But that's now become a litmus test for the party's nomination? Whatever happened to compassionate conservatism?

One other fact ought to figure into this conversation: The Massachusetts reforms happen to be working pretty well. According to the latest Census figures, Massachusetts was one of a handful of states in the number of people without insurance fell over the last year, despite the bad economy. As of last year, just 4.4 percent of residents lack coverage--the lowest uninsured rate in the country. And not only are people less likely to go without coverage. They are also less likely to skip care because of cost. There's still a lot of room for improvement and the reforms haven't, so far, reduced the cost of care--although that's because they weren't designed to do that in the first place. But polls show the state's residents like the reforms and want to keep them.

In a rational political universe, the governor who signed the Massachusetts law would brag about it. Apparently Republicans don't live in that universe