By: David Dayen
Matt Yglesias decides to chide liberals and tell them that they risk losing universal health care by not “cheerleading” for the Democrats enough. That’s the nub of the argument as near as I can tell. I thought Yglesias was the determinist who believes elections are a reflection of the state of the economy and the normal swings of a non-Presidential year, particularly when the current President relied on a voter base of just the people least likely to turn out in an off-year election. But I guess someone needed to take the blame.
What this neglects is that more people in the country, and given the big numbers I assume not just liberals, don’t think the law that passed resembles universal health care:
I’m not sure when this “clap louder” approach to politics ever worked throughout history, and therefore I am puzzled as to why anyone thinks it would work now. But the consistent approach for those dissatisfied with the Affordable Care Act would be to work for a better health care law, not the politicians who birthed this one. And the numbers are on their side, as 75% of Americans want substantial changes to the system.
Matt Yglesias decides to chide liberals and tell them that they risk losing universal health care by not “cheerleading” for the Democrats enough. That’s the nub of the argument as near as I can tell. I thought Yglesias was the determinist who believes elections are a reflection of the state of the economy and the normal swings of a non-Presidential year, particularly when the current President relied on a voter base of just the people least likely to turn out in an off-year election. But I guess someone needed to take the blame.
What this neglects is that more people in the country, and given the big numbers I assume not just liberals, don’t think the law that passed resembles universal health care:
President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul has divided the nation, and Republicans believe their call for repeal will help them win elections in November. But the picture’s not that clear cut.
A new AP poll finds that Americans who think the law should have done more outnumber those who think the government should stay out of health care by 2-to-1.
“I was disappointed that it didn’t provide universal coverage,” said Bronwyn Bleakley, 35, a biology professor from Easton, Mass.
I suppose the answer here would be that the law will not have a chance to gradually become universal if the Democrats lose. But the Democrats at risk for losing either grudgingly supported an imperfect law or opposed it on the grounds that it cost too much. Maybe they’re not the people to fix it.More than 30 million people would gain coverage in 2019 when the law is fully phased in, but another 20 million or so would remain uninsured. Bleakley, who was uninsured early in her career, views the overhaul as a work in progress.
I’m not sure when this “clap louder” approach to politics ever worked throughout history, and therefore I am puzzled as to why anyone thinks it would work now. But the consistent approach for those dissatisfied with the Affordable Care Act would be to work for a better health care law, not the politicians who birthed this one. And the numbers are on their side, as 75% of Americans want substantial changes to the system.
No comments:
Post a Comment