By The Right Scoop


This video back from 1994 should clear up any confusion (or smear campaign) that Santorum supported forcing Americans to buy health insurance. It is simply not true.

Watch below:

“I think what the role of the federal government is to provide opportunity for everyone to get what they want, to live their dreams and not to dictate what everybody should have,” he said.

And he explained why, which is even when certain things are mandated by the federal government, they often don’t work and added it simply is “not the American way of doing things.”

“You can’t force every American to do something they don’t want to do,” Santorum explained. “You can force people to be in Social Security, yet I think it’s only about 96 percent of Americans that are in Social Security. There are lots of mandates we put on people and they don’t obey. That’s wrong. That’s not the American way of doing things. The American way of doing things is getting people to live their dreams to make their choices.”

(via Daily Caller)

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop

Trending Now

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • http://www.facebook.com/steamboat2302 Joshua Saunders

    Thank you for posting this.

  • Anonymous

    Excellent, Scoop. I stand corrected. I don’t mind being proven wrong if it straightens out my understanding of everyone involved.

    Thanks

    • http://twitter.com/artfromtex Arthur Autrey

      This is what separates us from the Comm.. er, uh, Democrats. ; )

  • Anonymous

    It’s interesting that the media tries to crucify someone when they make innocent comments. Many politicians say, ‘I think everyone should have insurance’. And from that the media will spin ‘mandate’. I, too, think everyone should have insurance. Wouldn’t that be nice. But to federally mandate it is unconstitutional. Two different points altogether.

    • Anonymous

      Agreed. I think people shouldn’t get abortions, or marry people of the same sex, but I’m sure Santorum wouldn’t mandate how people should live their lives.

      • Anonymous

        We shouldn’t have to pay for something (abortions) that we consider murder and nobody says gays can’t get married (there’s a definition of ‘married’. They should choose another word, if gays want to do their thing).

        • Anonymous

          “We shouldn’t have to pay for something (abortions) that we consider murder”

          No one said so.

          “there’s a definition of ‘married’. They should choose another word, if gays want to do their thing”

          Words change.

          • Ned Williams

            Yes, words change and policy changes too, but only if a majority of elected representatives agree it should change. Sorry, but a majority of Americans don’t think we should dismantle the institution of marriage. And NO majority should be able to say that human life isn’t human life.

            • Anonymous

              Human rights isn’t up to a popular vote. Fact is, letting homosexuals enter into a voluntary contract doesn’t hurt them (since it’s voluntary) and doesn’t hurt you.

  • Anonymous

    And in contrast here is Newt Gingrich, before he was trying to pander to the Republican base.

    • http://black-avenger-1.livejournal.com/profile VirusX

      There just seems to be too many things that Gingrich just doesn’t have a fundamental grasp of, such as the Constitution and individual freedom. Thinking that government mandates for an un-Constitutional social program, which would be nothing more than a brand new, colossal unfunded liability that would dwarf them all [the other unfunded liabilities] shows something about him character and thought processes that I really don’t like.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jeremy-Poncy/1339730989 Jeremy Poncy

        Gingrich will give us a more conservative and more nationalistic version of what Obama has provided for the past 4 years. NO THANK YOU! Gingrich is the only person I fear is more dangerous than Obama. He looks like he’s going the way of Constantine. “Take this and conquer with it.” By this I mean Christianity but nothing about it is authentic. It’s a power play. Be very weary. Intelligence without character is dangerous.

        • Anonymous

          I don’t like Newt. He is a lyer, an adulturer, and not a conservative, but I wouldn’t say Newt is more dangerous than Obama. Obama is a Marxist. Newt is not. If Newt wins I’ll probably hold my nose and vote for him.

  • Constance

    Yeah, I thought so. I smell a rat – who wears mittens.

    • Anonymous

      Why, The Three Little Kittens of course, but they lost them.

      Now they know who has their mittens and will be on the prowl for that rat. They’re prolly big ole’ alley cats by now, and could scratch his eyes out.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    excellent research setting the record straight

  • http://black-avenger-1.livejournal.com/profile VirusX

    Well, that says it all, to me.

  • Anonymous

    The enemy is not the candidates. The enemy is Obama and his MSM propaganda ministry.
    Each candidate should be concentrating on that fact and slapping down the Obama agitprop mininions on the alphabet networks…you too FOX…

    Present your vision for America, and hammer home in every debate, why it is that the little man from nowhere in the WH, and his failed policies, sucks.

    Same with the Rockefeller Repubik talking heads. Stop being the “stupid party”. You’re just committing a collective act of hari-kari. Quit it…already.

    • Anonymous

      Not necessarily. Look at the battle between Hillary and the 0. Didn’t hurt him much. What I would love to see is the Republican candidate in a debate with the 0 and getting his worst slime, turning to him and saying, ‘We went all over that in the primaries. Let’s move on to something important, shall we? Like Obamacare, for example’.

      • Anonymous

        That’s an interesting take. I;m a little tired of the right spending so much time devouring their own. If this keeps up, O’Liar will hoist us up on our own petard. Its time for the right to ruck-up and focus on the real enemies: Obama, the MSM, China, Russia and Islam.

        • Anonymous

          Do you think the 0 and his cohorts won’t bring these things up, mainly to distract from his own lack of record? When they are out in the open, vetted and resolved, then it’s much easier to move onto important issues.

          • Anonymous

            Politics is a dirty business. Why not throw the dirt where it belongs; right back in their faces. Why not question why Mr Transparency is anything but lucid. Think the MSM will vett their boy-king? No. Its up to the right to do that. But they have abrogated their obligation to do that, and so, unless they get behind the process 100% and do what I said in my previous remarks, they will loose this election. Repubik pundits and Repubik reps, spent way too much time with their heads up their collective hind ends, while letting Obama and his minions kick back and watch the feeding frenzy. The Stupid Party has a bad case of Cranial Rectal Dysfunction. And the brain maggots that is the cause behind the libsticks diseased, swollen brains, have metastasized and spread to the right.

  • K-Bob

    If you can’t succeed by omitting facts, spin.
    If the spin doesn’t work, distort.
    If distortion isn’t enough, lie.

    Guess which part of the campaign we’re in now?

    • Anonymous

      We’re in the cam-PAIN phase.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t think what he says in October refutes what is claimed he said in May. Either the reporter interpreted events incorrectly or Santorum changed his mind in the heat of Hillarycare battle in the summer of 1994. We may never know definitively what was said in May, but we do know what was said in October.

  • Anonymous

    Thank you RS. Vote Santorum in FL to KEEP THIS THING GOING!!!!!! The longer our conservative message is repeated to “the great unwashed” the better. We will get the BEST anti-Romney, anti-Obama candidate possible the more people that are allowed to have a say in this thing. I say take it all the way to June. JMO.

  • Anonymous

    It is cool to see the precocious 14-year old Santorum so interested in politics.

    But, seriously, TRS is helping smash these smears in record time. Thanks.

  • http://no-apologies-round2.blogspot.com/ AmericanborninCanada

    Thank you Scoop! I tried to watch this earlier, but I couldn’t get it- so thank you for posting it!!

  • Anonymous

    Off Topic – Has anyone seen the ridiculous DRUDGE poll? They have Paul winning handily. Matt could learn a thing or two from TRS.

    • KenInMontana

      FINAL DRUDGE POLL RESULTS… READERS FROM FLORIDA ONLY: ROMNEY 34.78%… SANTORUM 24.61%… PAUL 22.7%… GINGRICH 17.92%…

      • Anonymous

        Is that different than their “Who Won The Jacksonville Debate?” poll?
        Probably a straw poll of likely votes.

  • Anonymous

    The depth of the hatred toward Santorum is not over social positions Obama himself holds but knowing this monstrous centralization of power in Obamacare will not stand. The “inevitability” the opposition craves is not in Mitt as the nominee but enshrining health care as a “right.” Can the Romney enacted Mass. Cap & Trade be far behind? More fool us.

    The TEA Party is told we must submit to working within the Republican party to gain influence. By the same reasoning, if we can’t have influence, surely we must stop submitting to their rules. “Don’t look at the polls. . . Don’t pay attention to what the national media are saying, what the pundits are saying. Listen to your heart. Lead. Don’t follow.” –Rick Santorum

  • Anonymous

    Vindication. Thank you for the great post!

  • Anonymous

    I was glad to hear someone finally bring this up last night. I didn’t watch, but This thing doesn’t need tweaked, or parts of it kept, it needs to be repealed. Romney said again last night he’d repeal it? I don’t believe him. Norm Coleman who’s working for his campaign, said he won’t repeal it, and would keep some of it.

    I believe nothing from him or the establishment Rhinos. John Boehner, Eric Cantor, and their ilk have lied too many times. They’ll get together, pretend they want it repealed and then make up an excuse to not do it. Please Ohio, get rid of Boehner.

  • Anonymous

    I always like the truth be told. Now, if only Mr. Low fat vanilla yogurt man could actually use it. Of coarse he should explain his vote for unions.

  • Anonymous

    Thank you for finding this video. I supported Santorum when he first ran for the Senate in PA and knew that he never supported the individual mandate. I hope this video finally puts this issue to rest.

  • CDS in Manitoba

    Is it just me, or does Rick Santorum’s voice sound very different in this older clip than it does today?

  • Rob Bryant

    Awesome. Very glad I added this site’s RSS to my live links!

  • Rob Bryant

    Awesome. Very glad I added this site’s RSS to my live links!

  • Anonymous

    But, but but, RS, this newspaper says this, and this other reporter says that! /

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EFVVN4ILMQ42UE3ZEKHNDTZ3J4 Jim F.

    Obama Blocked From Registering For Alabama State Primary Until Eligibility Is Validated By Court.

    http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/01/13/obama-blocked-from-registering-for-alabama-state-primary-until-eligibility-is-validated-by-court/

    • Anonymous

      You know he’s above the law. How dare Georgia sebpeona him to testify! He’s the usuper eh President of theUited States.

  • Anonymous

    I remember hearing speaking out against the health care mandate.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QVMI6RBJXIORLQ3GCOUNCNGO4Y Ben

    Makes we want a Santorum presidency even more!

    • Anonymous

      Santorum was my senator in PA, and I don’t trust his judgement. Some of the reasons can be found in these articles by the Club For Growth:

      http://www.clubforgrowth.org/news/?subsec=7&id=1007&v=pr
      http://www.clubforgrowth.org/perm/pr/?postID=1006

      BTW, the May 1994 article that stated Santorum was for the individual mandate was in this Lehigh Valley newspaper (page 2 of 3):

      http://articles.mcall.com/1994-05-02/news/2979474_1_cooper-grandy-health-reform-employees-premiums/2

      It appears he changed his mind by the time of the video later that year.

      • Anonymous

        There’s no direct quote from Santorum. Where’s video of his supposed support of the mandate? And its from one source in Allentown. Where’s the Philly Inquirer or Pittsburgh Post Gazette on something so important?

        • Anonymous

          I did not say there was a video. I was merely commenting on the mandate issue.

          My dislike for Santorum is based on his history of hypocrisy: claiming to be conservative, but voting over and over again like a big-government, crony-capitalist liberal. The two articles from the Club For Growth only scratch the surface. His continual support for bailing out the boondoggle called Amtrak are not his only ventures into crony capitalism. Check out this article from the Washington Times:

          http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/8/santorum-backed-pittsburgh-stadium-tax-hike/?page=all#pagebreak

          Can you believe that arrogant jackass? The people overwhelmingly voted against funding the new stadiums, but Good-Old-Boy Rick knew what was best for them. Conservative, my behind.

          • Anonymous

            I have a different take on Santorum than you do. I have read the club for growth report, and frankly they have an issue on his spending votes. But did you see how they praise him for entitlements and taxes? Do you remember he also ended welfare and authored the partial birth abortion ban? Did you also know that his office was the “go-to” one for vetting judicial confirmations on the Hill? His overall record from all the conservative organizations is 80-90 percent.

            But, you probably don’t care or even know about those things, b/c your mind is already made up. You are too concerned with your purity test. Does Newt meet it? Or are you overlooking Newt’s much more glaring hypocrises b/c you think he can beat Obama?

            I have news for you, Pat Toomey will disappoint you as well. We live in a very liberal state, and they will not vote to your liking 100 percent. In fact, Toomey is already open to raising taxes being on the SuperCommittee. He will vote for whatever liberal justice Obama puts up, he even said he would vote for Sotomoyor.

            • Anonymous

              “. . . probably don’t care or even know about those things”

              You have no clue what I know, so why speculate? All you have to do is ask.

              You are correct that Santorum is for lower taxes (most of the time), but he is also a very big spender. Those two traits in combination is tantamount to fiscal insanity.

              • Anonymous

                You are right, I have no clue … that’s why the qualifier “probably” is in that sentence. I “assume” b/c of your original argumentation,… and depiction of Santorum, that’s why I arrived at my conclusion. Its a logical assessment to make after reading your criticism of Santorum, that’s all.

                He’s alot more conservative than Newt or Romney. He voted for some bad things all Republicans did back then to support Bush, but Santorum didn’t spend time talking up Leftist policies like the mandate (just recently in May), global warming, and in fact, Newt lobbied for Medicare Part D .. so, if you make those SAME criticisms of Santorum, you MUST make them for Newt (and Romney) as well. Newt fought spending cuts while Speaker, and preserved the earmarked system.

        • Anonymous

          Forgot to mention, there was another article in the Morning Call mentioning Santorum’s support for the individual mandate, but this one was a month earlier, on April 7, 1994. The article states that both senatorial candidates, Santorum and Watkins, responded to the League of Women’s Voters queries which centered on health care, welfare reform and crime. Quoting:

          “Santorum and Watkins both called for a “comprehensive restructuring” of health care. But they differed sharply on what elements should comprise a basic benefits package.

          Watkins would include mental health services, long-term care, prescription drug coverage, dental services and preventive care such as immunizations. Santorum would not. Both reject abortion services.

          Santorum and Watkins both oppose having businesses provide health care for their employees. Instead, they would require individuals to purchase insurance. Both oppose higher taxes on alcohol or tobacco to help pay for care.

          They also oppose government-run health care and disagree with controls on doctor or hospital fees. They would cap malpractice awards.”

          [Note: both opposed government-run health care, but both support an individual mandate. Hmmm. continuing. . .]

          “Both support extra federal spending for more local police and other anti-crime programs. . .”

          Where does the constitution allow the federal government to have any role in local police matters?

          This is what drives me nuts about Santorum. He is always smarter than the constitution in his own mind.

          • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

            Do not see “individual mandate” here at all. The editoralization of the information by the newspaper does not help in understanding what “requirement” means. Just from the context, it would seem that businesses will no longer be required to purchase insurance for their employees and individuals if they want it must purchase it themselves. This does not mean “MANDATE”.

            • Anonymous

              What is your take on Santorum’s support for extra federal spending for local police? Here is James Madison’s take:

              “If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands;they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, everything, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress.”

              • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

                I have never stated that Santorum is without any flaws. It is that the “mandate” which is the topic at hand is not one of them. He clearly has admitted to mistakes he has made, especially with Medicaid D.

                Comparing him to the other candidates, he is cleaner than a Marine’s barracks waiting for inspection. Mitt Romney is Pinocchio; Newt is a bull in a China shop; and Paul…an ostrich in the sand at times. I am willing to try to tame the bull and work with an ostrich, but a person who cannot accept responsibility for own actions….cannot be of use until he sees it for himself.

  • http://twitter.com/AminCad AminCad

    What proof? He says one thing while he takes a position on an issue that directly contradicts it. This is typical Santorum.

    He claimed in 2005 that libertarianism, low taxes, and individual liberty are not conservative values:

    http://www.libertariannews.org/2012/01/05/santorum-rages-against-individualism-freedom-and-liberty-on-air/

    Now, seven years later, he is talking about how he represents freedom and the American way, while Obama represents big government.

    The guy is a hypocrite, a liar and a panderer, who will do any thing to get power.

    He made $970,000 in 2010 working for the big industry groups that were his biggest campaign contributors when he was in the Senate. In the Senate he received huge contributions from big pharmaceutical firms, to the point that pharma giant GSX stated in an internal memo that his departure from the Senate “creates a big hole that we need to fill.”

    Santorum also supported the creation of Medicare D, which was called “the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s” by the Comptroller General of the United Stated, adding $9 trillion to the entitlement debt.

    Paul, in contrast, has been consistent for 30 years. The only thing consistent about Mitt, Newt and Santorum is how often they change their positions.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Beale-Bauguess/100003289525911 Beale Bauguess

      Being consistent doesn’t make you right.

  • http://twitter.com/artfromtex Arthur Autrey

    CLEAR. CUT.

    Go, Rick, go! Best man in the race.

  • Anonymous

    I say again; I like Rick Santorum and I believe he has a shot at this thing. At the very least, he shines the Conservative light on the other candidates.

  • ApplePie101

    Santorum is like a fresh breeze blowing over the parched political landscape.

  • Mike Lee

    Santorum should run this clip, as is, 24/7. Bravo.

  • Anonymous

    Those dang facts…..

  • http://twitter.com/slvrser Frank

    But he (and his buddy Gingrich) DID vote against the program that became the E-Verify system. Numbers USA gave him a “D” on his overall stance on immigration. They also note that he failed to act on changing the status quo, reduce refugee and asylum fraud and to reduce anchor baby citizenship.

    http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/december-29-2011/santorum-surges-iowa-pause-check-his-immigration-profile.html

    So much for ‘squeaky clean’ Santorum’s Senate record that oblivious far right conservatives would like to believe.

  • Anonymous

    He was voicing opposition to Hilliary Care and single payer. He was NOT opposing the federal mandate of the heritage foundation. He was opposing the Government madbating which insurance you choose.

    • Anonymous

      Twice during his senatorial primary campaign, his hometown paper reported that he supported requiring individuals to carry health insurance. Both times they reported it, neither he nor his campaign contested the report. It is still not crystal clear. I would like to see more information of this time of his political career, but this video by no means exonerates him. This was obviously a conversation about Hilliary care.