Liberals have a problem with bright shiny objects
By all means, celebrate the Arizona gay-rights victory. But don't forget about other issues in other states.
From the moment that the Supreme Court allowed states to opt out of the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid – in a 7-2 ruling joined by Justices Breyer and Kagan – I’ve been among the more pessimistic when it comes to assessing the willingness of states to accept the expansion. Yes, the deal being offered states seems too good to pass up – the federal government covers the full cost of the expansion for the first three years, sliding down to 90 percent for the long term.
Bill Clinton has been one of Obamacare’s most effective advocates—the "Secretary of Explaining Things," as President Obama famously called him. But in a new interview already getting attention and sure to get more, Clinton didn't explain things very well. He made a statement that's likely to create some misimpressions about the possibilities of health care reform, while giving the administration and its allies yet another political headache. But maybe it's also an opportunity to have a serious conversation about the law's tradeoffs—the one that should have happened a while ago.
In the spring of 2012, while reporting a piece on the political landscape in Ohio, I spent several hours on two successive afternoons tagging along with canvassers from Working America, the AFL-CIO affiliate that tries to mobilize people who don’t have a union to join at work but would like to be part of the organized labor mission.