If you had told me that would be today's headline at any point over the past decade, I'm not sure I would have believed you.
If this works out, the President has another thing to add to his list of "things no President before me achieved".
If this works out, the President has another thing to add to his list of "things no President before me achieved".
Further, Obama wasn't responsible for the ACA.
edit: if the US had universal healthcare, the US wouldn't have 30+ million people without health coverage today.
Its obviously not demonstrable, but perhaps not; while the attacks that were thrown at the effort Clinton spearheaded as First Lady were largely unjustified, and since the style of plan both Clinton and Obama supported (of which the ACA is an instantiation) isn't much like the effort Clinton spearheaded (and is, in fact, more like what a number of insurers proposed in response to that), there were a lot of political negative associations with Clinton and healthcare that Obama didn't have.
> Personally, I think it would have sailed through much more easily had she been in office.
Based on...what, exactly?
Yeah, Mitt Romney really doesn't get the credit he deserves.
The US system has very little in common with European style universal healthcare. To say nothing of the extreme cost most Americans still pay for their health insurance, or the bankruptcies that are still overwhelming in the system.
Universal healthcare that bankrupts millions of people? That's an inherently ridiculous premise.
[1] http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/13/news/economy/obamacare-unins...
If you test positive for AIDS you can after the fact buy health insurance long before you need significant medical care. That implies a defacto basic level of coverage for long term chronic conditions which is by far the largest issue.
PS: As to the 11.9% figure, that does not include large numbers of people with significant access to health care that’s not based on insurance. EX: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_White_Care_Act 'improve availability of care for low-income, uninsured and under-insured victims of AIDS and their families.'
The VA also provides a lot of free healthcare for people without insurance. Not to mention prisoners getting free healthcare.
The legislation signed by Obama is not universal healthcare in any sense. Maybe universal health insurance, but certainly not healthcare. Insurance does not make healthcare affordable.
"Universal health care is not a one-size-fits-all concept and does not imply coverage for all people for everything." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care Note from that page: "The Swiss Healthcare system and US Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act are based on compulsory insurance."
PS: Hospitals are required to treat some life threating heath conditions like gunshot wounds without asking about payment. So, that also counts as a limited (some conditions) form of universal (all people) heath care.
Arguably, free speech would be universal but not total as there are limits on nonpolitical speech.
Edit: IMO, the implementation was terrible, but it's still a huge improvement.
Maybe it doesn't work as well, but that's down to the details, not because it's inherently different in how it works.
ACA provides tax-deduction bonuses to people who purchase "high-deductable" plans to encourage people to actually _look_ at the bills they get from the doctor, instead of thinking "My Insurance pays for this anyway. I don't care".
That's... about it. Granted, these high-deductable plans have various standards (no preexisting conditions) on them, but at the end of the day, its a mechanism to attempt to bring the free market back into the health care system.
Health care remains broken, but at least it is more obvious to consumers now.
Iran, in contrast, is well on its way to having a functional democracy. The power of the ayatollah wanes every year, and every new generation of young Iranians is more liberal than before. The best thing the U.S. can do is be friendly and wait for that to play out. Because if there is any hope for another democracy in the Middle East, it's in a place where people are already accustomed to the benefits of having a functioning government with significant and growing public participation.
National stereotypes, pillars of pragmatic diplomacy ever since 2000 BC and the clear mark of logical thinkers the world over.
> If Obama cares about Iran, he would have supported their Green Revolution
How do you know he didn't? Because he didn't send in bombers to "support demonstrations"?
> Yet, strangely, Obama supported the Egyptian coup
... when the alternative would have been much more Iran-friendly; yeah, how strange, right? Honestly, how do you make these random mental associations?
> He sort of waddles along weakening the U.S. position whenever possible.
A comprehensive Iran-US 'peace deal' (or even a strategic partnership going forward) would immensely strengthen US standing around the world, dramatically reducing tensions in the Middle East and providing a balance to the uncritical reliance on Saudi Arabia and Turkey that so much pain has brought since the '90s (from Al Qaeda to IS). So uhm, there is that.
But yeah, I agree that it weakens fearmongers' positions, both in US, Israel and Iran.
>National stereotypes, pillars of pragmatic diplomacy ever since 2000 BC and the clear mark of logical thinkers the world over.
The OP clearly means the theocratic regime, not the Iranian people themselves.
If you let me select both the Republican and Democratic candidates, I'll happily let the people vote however they want.
> How do you know he didn't? Because he didn't send in bombers to "support demonstrations"?
Come on, it's quite clear that Obama was very low-key during the Green Revolution protests, much lower-key than he needed to be.
Obama is not a saint (he relies on the same corporate interests and even the same personnel a Clinton would), but it's hard to fault him for his moves regarding Iran.
Guess what, they have to spin deals to their public too.
If Israel having nukes hasn't set off a nuclear arms race I'm really confused as to how Iran not having them is supposed to.