The fiscal catastrophe that is ACA demonstrates that to make complicated and sometimes painful changes requires that both sides be committed to the outcome. And for that to happen both sides must have had a hand in the law. With ACA Republicans had none and therefore have none and are enraged to boot.
Charles Blahous:
Much of this was predictable—indeed predicted—from the outset. After 1983’s Social Security solvency rescue, the two major parties were both invested in upholding politically painful measures such as delaying cost-of-living adjustments, imposing income taxes on benefits, and raising the retirement age. In 2010, on the other hand, a major federal spending expansion—as well as the controversial measures required to pay for it—was muscled through Congress by one party over the impassioned opposition of the other. That the finances of such a program are already proving politically untenable should surprise no one.
The only reason the thing hasn't collapsed already is because the president keeps making illegal changes to the law.
Read the sordid tale here.
No comments:
Post a Comment