David Phillippe · @ddoublep
5th Jun 2013 from TwitLonger
<rate shock rant>
1) It should be recognized that protestations from the right on what Obama and/or Gruber said or didn't say in the leadup to ACA constitutes a *political* argument against how the law was sold by those two people. This is not, however, an argument on how the law was designed. Ezra Klein's (and other policy folks on the left) coverage was, expectedly, nuanced in a way that didn't satisfy conservative desire for the only takeaway to be "ACA = apocalypse." In short; so what? The focus of right-leaning criticism centered on the political promises of a bill that hasn't changed much since being passed is mostly an uninteresting grab for political points in a dead argument.
2) I find the moral and intellectual indignation that some young, affluent, and healthy people — which Chait described as "Bros" — will have to pay more utterly unpersuasive given that little to no words have been written on those who will experience more rate shock because they live in a state that refused the Medicaid expansion. These folks, all 3.6 million of them, perhaps deserve some of your anti-ACA righteousness as well.
</rate shock rant>