My problem with Obamacare

[ProSense]

4. I think

"But we must acknowledge that Obamacare is based on a Heritage Foundation conservative plan. When progressives first looked at these ideas there were many valid criticism showing it's shortcomings. (I tried a google search for that time period but all the results were only from the last few years.) "

...people take the comparisons too literally. The Heritage proposals were really abstract.

Krugman explained the disconnect best, citing what Jonathan Chait calls the "Heritage uncertainty principle":

And here’s the thing: Republicans don’t want to help the unfortunate. They’ll propound health-care ideas that will, they claim, help those with preexisting conditions and so on — but those aren’t really proposals, they’re diversionary tactics designed to stall real health reform. Chait finds Newt Gingrich more or less explicitly admitting this.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/a-health-care-mystery-explained/?_r=0

Republican proposals are hypothetical and theoretical BS. They have no intention of doing anything positive. They get credit for pushing things that they don't actually support and would never enact.

It's like Romney's veto of the most significant parts of the MA health care law, which is what Obamacare is really based on.

Compare it to the MA health care law, which was a product of the MA Democratic legislature. Democrats made significant changes to Mitt Romney's proposal. In fact, Romney opposed those changes, and upon signing the bill into law, vetoed them. Romney's vetoes were overturned by the legislature.

In Fall 2005, the House and Senate each passed health care insurance reform bills. The legislature made a number of changes to Governor Romney's original proposal, including expanding MassHealth (Medicaid and SCHIP) coverage to low-income children and restoring funding for public health programs. The most controversial change was the addition of a provision which requires firms with 11 or more workers that do not provide "fair and reasonable" health coverage to their workers to pay an annual penalty. This contribution, initially $295 annually per worker, is intended to equalize the free care pool charges imposed on employers who do and do not cover their workers.

On April 12, 2006, Governor Mitt Romney signed the health legislation.[23] Romney vetoed eight sections of the health care legislation, including the controversial employer assessment.[24] Romney also vetoed provisions providing dental benefits to poor residents on the Medicaid program, and providing health coverage to senior and disabled legal immigrants not eligible for federal Medicaid.[25] The legislature promptly overrode six of the eight gubernatorial section vetoes, on May 4, 2006, and by mid-June 2006 had overridden the remaining two.[26]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform#Legislation

I mean, that's a good start, and while the ACA improved on that, there is still room for improvement.