| Bandorr said: I guess that is true. With enough successes they could try it again, but it would need to be quite changed even then. |
The thing about American government is that substantive, universal changes happen with the regularity of miracles, namely because they either take full bipartisan support (most innocuous bills that fail do so because more extreme partisan additions are sneakily added in the process) or an overwhelming share of power by one party. Once something becomes the law of the land it is extremely difficult to turn around, as all of those republican congressmen now represented people who relied on ACA, as flawed as it is. ACA is in practice, so either side can't rely on theoretical outcomes anymore for the arguments for or against.
To be fair, the system is designed this way, as fast acting change is often massively destabalizing, and the process of extreme vetting and slow, arduous change prevents most shortsighted or downright sinister proposals to go through. Emphasis on most though. I can think of a pretty large number of decisions I feel had drastically poor outcomes on the American people...
