I would argue that the GOP has forced the ACA further rightward, despite being based on the GOP's own plan (alternative to "Hillarycare") from the mid-90s. Or quite similar to Romney's plan in Massachusetts. I think the ACA doesn't go nearly far enough, because of GOP resistance and GOP grandstanding and GOP lies like "death panels." So, yes, I can, in fact, consider the party that's out of power the responsible actor, because the Democrats are spineless wimps who triangulate and move rightward in the name of compromise when the GOP isn't acting in good faith in the slightest. The GOP holds all the power, whether they're in the majority or not.
IMO, the ACA improves things, but not nearly enough, and that's because the GOP forced it rightward (by holding the Senate to a mandatory 60-vote majority through threats of filibuster, as well as the lies of mouthpieces like Palin and Beck). There's not enough provisions for cost control; there are massive gimmes to the drug companies; there are so many sops to the insurance companies; it doesn't create Medicare for All.
But then, what do I know about health care? I'm just a health care provider and a socialist. And we're /never/ correct in this political climate, even though social health systems work fairly well throughout Europe.
no subject
Date: 2011-02-11 01:42 pm (UTC)From:IMO, the ACA improves things, but not nearly enough, and that's because the GOP forced it rightward (by holding the Senate to a mandatory 60-vote majority through threats of filibuster, as well as the lies of mouthpieces like Palin and Beck). There's not enough provisions for cost control; there are massive gimmes to the drug companies; there are so many sops to the insurance companies; it doesn't create Medicare for All.
But then, what do I know about health care? I'm just a health care provider and a socialist. And we're /never/ correct in this political climate, even though social health systems work fairly well throughout Europe.