Mitt Romney's Speech at CPAC

Mitt Romney will address the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) at 1255 on Friday.  Here is an excerpt from what he SHOULD say.


"My friends, it is good to be back at CPAC again.  Four years ago at this time, I announced the end of my candidacy for the Republican nomination for President--right here at CPAC.  I hope some of you remember that time.  While I did not win the nomination, it was an honor and a privilege to run, and to be widely touted as the "conservative alternative" to Senator McCain. 

Four years later, I am running again for President.  Things are going pretty well, and I am grateful for the support of many people in this room.  Senator Santorum had a good night on Tuesday, and Speaker Gingrich has run a spirited campaign.  Ron Paul continues to put ideas forward in his candidacy that should make all of us think, and think hard, about business as usual.

But that is what campaigns are all about.  Accomplished people from all walks of life set their sights on a goal because they truly believe they can change things for the better.  I am convinced each of my opponents have that goal in their hearts and I would be proud to pull the lever in November for any one of them over the current occupant of the White House. 

But I don't intend to do that, as I fully intend to be the nominee of our party and take the oath of office next January.  To do that, I will need your support.  Not just your votes, mind you, but your support.  And it is your support that I am re-doubling my efforts to attain.

What has happened in the four years since I stood here as "the Conservative alternative"?  Have I become less Conservative?  Have I become the caricature that I am made out to be by some of my opponents?  No.  Of course not.  What has happened is that for three years, a European-style social democrat has trampled the Constitution and injected government more closely into the lives of every American.  And America reacted, reacted by organically creating one of the most sincere and coherent grass roots political movements of the last 100 years--I'm talking of course, about the Tea Party. 

The Tea Party has very simple goals, and they are mine.  They believe in adhering to the Constitution.  That's what I believe.  They believe less government is better than more government.  That's what I believe.  They believe that we cannot spend our way to prosperity and we cannot tax ourselves to solvency.  That's what I believe. 

Clearly, I am not some of those in the Tea Party's "cup of tea".  We have disagreements on some issues--some of which are real, some imagined.  But I am here to tell you that while I am flattered that many people refer to me by William F. Buckley's famous line, "the most conservative candidate who is electable", I assert here before you today that I am the most conservative candidate AND the most electable.  I remain the man I was in 2008--the Conservative Alternative--but this time, I am the Conservative Alternative to Barack Obama, and I intend to beat him in November, by pounding home the ideas of shrinking and limiting government, increasing freedom at home and abroad, and re-building our military as the necessary predicate of rebuilding our position in the world.  No more apologies friends, just action.

Now it seems to me that there are two issues that constitute the large majority of objections to my candidacy among some in this room.  Those issues are healthcare and abortion.  I will take each in its turn.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. 

 

This is the 10th Amendment to our Constitution, an Amendment liberals tend to try and forget--but which great Conservatives like Rick Perry from Texas continue to remind us is the law of the land.  When I was Governor of Massachusetts, the OVERWHELMINGLY Democrat-controlled legislature sought to impose a socialist, government-run healthcare system on the people of Massachusetts.  As the Republican Governor--whose signature could and was routinely over-ridden by their numbers--my job was to do my very best to ensure that the State of Massachusetts retained a market-based healthcare system.  Keep in mind, friends, that one's ability to make real and lasting change in healthcare in this country is stymied at virtually every turn by interventionist over-reach by the Federal government.  Between the two equally ridiculous limiting factors of a Democrat controlled legislature and Federal over-reach, I was able to work with the legislature to bring forward THE LEAST damaging healthcare plan that could be envisioned.  Remember--they could--and did--routinely over-ride me.  This is not a complaint, it is a fact of life for a Governor in a minority party.  One of the provisions of our plan--a plan in which the overwhelming majority of people in the state retained their previous insurance with no change--was a mandate to purchase insurance or be fined.  This appears to be the single most objectionable provision in the plan to my fellow conservatives.  Let's talk about it for a bit.

 

Many people in this room have spilled gallons of ink on the discussion of the proportion of American wage earners who bear no income tax liability, who pay little or nothing toward the defense of the nation and its everyday operations.  Yet for some reason, the fact that in Massachusetts, there were literally thousands of people who CHOSE not to purchase medical care...--leaving the People of the State responsible for costs when such health care became necessary--escapes notice.  It did not escape my notice.  I was tired of people free-riding on the hard working citizens of my State, and I did something about it.  Friends, you may not like the policy choice I made, but if you believe it is unconstitutional, we'll just have to disagree--and I will point to the 10th Amendment to back me up.  The Constitution gives the States the authority to legislate where it the Federal government is not supreme--and faced with the choice of socialist medicine or enforcing responsibility, I chose responsibility. 

The plain truth of the matter is that President Obama and the Congress explicitly did NOT have the authority that we had in Massachusetts, and it was exactly the kind of over-reach that we saw in Obama-care that caused the framers to create both the Commerce Clause and the 10th Amendment.  This is why Obamacare is unconstitutional, and this is why I will work with the Congress to repeal it and I will hobble it through Executive Orders wherever I can. 

What is not Conservative about protecting States Rights?  What is not Conservative about demanding personal responsibility?  What is not Conservative about insisting that the Executive and Legislative branches adhere to the Constitution?  And friends--what is not Conservative about doing everything one can to eliminate the specter of socialized medicine in one's state against tall political odds?  I did all of these things.  I am a Conservative.

Moving on to abortion, it is true to say that my views have evolved; not for political expediency, mind you, but because life taught me lessons--about life.  My time as Governor of Massachusetts was particularly instructive, and the vehemence with which the pro-abortion crowd pursued their aims caused me to think more deeply about the subject than I had previously.  There were people with multiple degrees and high-standing in the community who believed strongly that there was no moral wrong in the creation and harvesting of embryos for research.  This put me over the edge.  What exactly did they believe was being created?  It was a life, a human being.  Their casual dismissal of human life caused me to think more deeply about all aspects of this question--and in that inquiry, I hardened my position as a pro-lifer.  Please--someone--anyone--tell me that it was a good political move for the Governor of Massachusetts--one of the most Democrat and pro-abortion states in the Union --to become ardently pro-life? 

Look.  I understand that there are some among you who dismiss me because you think I've had everything handed to me.  Fine.  I don't see myself changing your mind, even though there isn't a shred of truth to that view.  I did not inherit my wealth, I went out and earned it.  I worked hard, I studied hard, I played by the rules, I married the woman of my dreams and raised a family that makes me proud every day.  Along the way, I made a lot of money for a lot of other people, from small investors to partners in multi-nationals.  While EACH OF MY OPPONENTS spent the vast majority of their productive adult lives on the government payroll, I was out there in the economy , throwing elbows, driving hard deals and creating return on investment.  Along the way, I became rich.  As you've seen recently, I pay all the taxes I am required to pay and I make sure I put some aside each year for charity. 

I have lived a full life;  I have lived a Conservative life.  I governed in Massachusetts as conservatively as anyone could--anyone that is, who hoped to be able to balance every budget he put forward and who hoped to lower taxes 19 times.

Ladies and Gentlemen--I AM the Conservative Alternative.  Still, and again.  I will not abandon you, I will not take you for granted, and I will not cut irresponsible deals in favor of expedience.  But--I will tell the truth--to you and anyone else who wishes to listen to it.  I will tell you when adherence to ideology is truly damaging to our long-term interests and to the security and prosperity of the Nation.  I will tell you when I believe we should hold the line, and when an agreement with our opponents today can serve to enable great triumphs of conservatism tomorrow.  Come with me, friends, and let us begin anew the great work of our founders.  Thank you"