President Obama could do worse. Romney has a bad reputation among Congressional Democrats, so I can't imagine they'd cotton to this. In fact, it's highly unlikely. But what Romney, in a bipartisan fashion, was able to do in Massachusetts -- even with caveats -- is pretty much the same as what Obama wants to do on a national level. Karen Tumulty notes that Romney is the only American who can claim the provision of universal health care as a resume line. Didn't help him in the GOP too much, but that's another discussion. If Obama wanted to bring Romney into the cabinet, he'd have to balance him by appointing a pro-choicer to a top HHS post because there are so many controversial, sexuality-related programs in that department that apportion money. The thinking here is that Romney would be the White House health care czar and that a Democrat -- Gov. Kitzhaber of Oregon, maybe -- would move over to Health and Human Services.
What does Romney get out of it? Assuming that Obama's ship is merely listing now and that the economy has recovered perceptablly, 2012 is not going to be an attractive cycle year for a Republican to run for president. If managerial chops are what's needed, then Romney's resume cuts in... something that, again, the GOP didn't seem to much appreciate in 2008. Like Hillary Clinton, Romney might be willing to trade his political ambition for the chance to do something awesome for the country.
Highly, highly improbable that this will happen. On the other hand, Obama seems to be willing to look at the Republican bench when his own side falls down.
My question here - and I suppose it goes for the "provocation" concept in general - is where this speculation came from.
Is this someone floating a trial balloon? If so, is it the Romney camp, a GOPer attempting to make him appear bipartisan in a suspect manner, a Dem trying to drum up improve-my-chances worst-case-scenarios, or some other possibility? Is this an idea Marc had that he likes, in which case it's essentially a personnel recommendation from a journalist?
So, again, either someone had a motive for floating this name, or someone incompetently couldn't keep either speculation or information under wraps, or Marc is putting forth a rather odd bit of assertive policy/personnel opinion... merits of the idea aside, I can't help but focus more on how the lack of context makes this an incredibly weird post
All of that aside, it would be a really wonderful idea, though Mitt's inability to say anything positive about Massachusetts might diminish his effectiveness
Only people who have no familiarity with Massachusetts can make this proposal with a straight face, or, if they are near someone fromthe bay state,without ducking.
Romney was the worst governor ever. when he was in state, he more often gummed up the works than did anything that passed for team work or leadership. He stands for nothing, stands by no one and takes credit for successes due to the hard work and genuine leadership of others.
Ireneinmass is absolutely correct. Mitt Romney stands only for himself. He just happened to be governor while health care legislation passed. The most you can say is that he didn't veto it. As a Massachusetts native, I could live with his inability to be positive about the state; it was his constant trashing of it that was disgusting.
Romney very clearly wants to run again and although 2012 will likely be another bad year for Republicans, it would be foolish for him to essentially write himself out of the race prematurely.
The only way it'd work is if he basically said that this program is going to happen and its better to have a Republican at the top than some tax-and-spend Democrat etc, Frame it in a way that appeals to Conservatives and moderates while also being respectful of Obama.