Mitt Romney’s economics... Flip back please

The probable Republican nominee should stop pandering to the left on China and to the right on taxes

TO UNDERSTAND why Mitt Romney has triumphed over his rivals for the Republican presidential nomination, look no further than March’s disappointing job numbers. With growth fragile and petrol prices soaring, the economy is Barack Obama’s gaping weak spot, and Republican primary voters have backed the candidate best equipped to exploit it.

Yet it is very far from clear what they are getting. Blame that, in part, on a nominating contest that repeatedly veered into irrelevancies. But blame the candidate, too. In the past year Mr Romney’s views have metamorphosed worryingly as he has tried to protect his flank against a succession of conservative challengers. It is no exaggeration to say that there are now two Romneys when it comes to economics (see article).

The first Romney is the relatively pragmatic, businesslike figure who emerges from his 2010 book (“No Apology: The Case for American Greatness”, a tome which is mercifully cleverer than the title), his formal speeches and his campaign documents. This Romney offers several welcome alternatives to Mr Obama’s policies. He would compel regulators to pay closer attention to the costs they impose. He would take a modest step towards tackling America’s unsustainable entitlement programmes by raising the age at which the elderly can collect public-pension and health-care benefits. He would convert the federal contribution to Medicaid, the federal-state health programme for the poor, to a system of block grants.

http://www.economist.com/node/21553024?fsrc=scn/tw/te/ar/flipbackplease