 |
| The House version of healthcare reform, left, and the Senate version, right. |
Michael Tanner for National Review, here:
The new health-care law is generally regarded as the signature achievement of the president’s first term. It’s certainly emblematic of Obama’s entire approach to government and what we can expect from his second-term initiatives.
Everything Mr. Tanner says about ObamaCare sounds right. The problem is, Obama played no role in it. The community organizer organized the legislative community under Democrat leadership, and they designed it, not him.
Obama provided zero leadership formulating what we call ObamaCare. He relinquished his leadership role entirely, allowing Pelosi's House and Reid's Senate to draft their versions of it and to hash the thing out, which ended up being an amalgam of the creations of the two chambers of the legislature. Obama contributed zero, zip, nada, nothing, and Michael Tanner misses entirely that ObamaCare turned out to look like the camel it is when it was supposed to look like a horse.
ObamaCare is healthcare disform, because Obama is a president who is largely absent and not up to the task in any case. Without control of both houses of the legislature, the future will provide no more such camels designed to be horses, unless the Republicans permit it.
Gridlock. Embrace it. Love it. Depend on it.
Gridlock. Embrace it. Love it. Depend on it.
