Collision 2012: Obama vs. Romney and the Future of Elections in America by Dan Balz Read Free Book Online Page B

on the challenge, and with the skills he had applied to failing companies at Bain he turned the games around. With that success, he again set his sights on political office, this time the governorship of Massachusetts.
    Romney’s gubernatorial campaign finally gave him the political victory that had eluded him eight years earlier in his challenge to Kennedy. He muscled aside a sitting Republican governor, won a subsequent primary, and defeated his Democratic rival to claim the office. He was sworn in as governor in January 2003. He had run as a businessman and an outsider who vowed that he would be a CEO governor. He brought the same style to government that he had practiced in business—sizing up problems, analyzing mounds of data, dissecting options, and finally settling on a course of action. Politically he was anything but a natural. Democrats in the state legislature found him standoffish and at times imperial in his approach. He inherited a sizable budget shortfall and moved swiftly to cut spending on a host of programs. But when spending cuts alone would not close the entire gap he turned to revenues, ending some loopholes and raising fees. He governed as a fiscal conservative, pressing a resistant legislature to cut taxes. But he was more successful in preventing any general tax increase than he was in enacting significant cuts. When he realized that Democrats would continue to block his agenda, he campaigned during the 2004 elections in an effort to boost Republican strength in the legislature. Instead, his party lost ground. His relations with the Democrats left the state polarized politically on most issues unless Democrats were motivated by self-interest to cooperate.
    The one area where Romney found common ground with the Democrats was on comprehensive health care reform, which became his signature achievement as governor. The Massachusetts law required every citizen topurchase insurance—an individual mandate—or pay a penalty. Romney was initially skeptical about whether the state could in fact achieve universal coverage. Once he was convinced it was possible, he threw himself into the effort to design a program. He called in outside experts and applied the tools of a management consultant to the task. Democratic legislators expanded the measure beyond what Romney had recommended, but he proudly signed it into law, with his old rival Ted Kennedy at the ceremony. “ My son said that having Senator Kennedy and me together like this on stage, behind the same piece of landmark legislation, will help slow global warming,” Romney joked. “That’s because Hell has frozen over.” When it was Kennedy’s turn to speak, he said, “My son said something too and that is when Kennedy and Romney support a piece of legislation, usually one of them hasn’t read it.” Pausing for laughter from the audience, he said, “That’s not true today, is it governor?”
    As governor, Romney underwent a transformation on social issues. He shifted on gay rights. He had never supported same-sex marriage and spoke out against the state’s highest court when it approved it. He also backed away from his endorsement of a federal antidiscrimination statute and a more expansive position on whether openly gay soldiers should be allowed to serve in the military. He changed his position on abortion. When he ran for governor he said he was personally pro-life but would do nothing to limit a woman’s right to choose. Later, as he was working on the issue of stem cell research and funding, he said he came out of the experience with a different view. He declared that he was staunchly pro-life. The bumpy transition came as Romney’s ambitions shifted from Massachusetts to the presidency.
    In February 2005, a group of reporters from the
Post
interviewed Romney at the National Governors Association meeting in Washington. He was already eyeing the race for president but had not yet publicly ruled out running for reelection as governor. I