«

»

U.S. Health Reform: Another ‘Moral Victory’ for Obama (Le Temps, Switzerland)


Jun 29, 2012 by

The Supreme Court’s hugely surprising decision on the Affordable Care Act, aka/Obamacare, is being greeted in much of Europe as an embrace of common sense. For Switzerland’s Le Temps, columnist Stephane Bussard writes that the decision is not only a ‘courageous decision’ by a ‘discredited’ U.S. Supreme Court, it is a testament to President Obama’s commitment to get the job done, despite the financial crisis and ‘Republican obstructionism.’

For Le Temps, columnist Stephane Bussard starts off this way:

For Barack Obama, the ratification of health reform confirms the principal success of his presidency. It is also a reward for Obama’s moral stand and his personal commitment. No president before him had succeeded or even attempted to reform a system so plagued by health lobbies and undermined by such an uncontrollable explosion of costs. During the debate over the Affordable Care Act, many have criticized the apparent lack of control of the process by the White House. However, against the advice of Vice President Joe Biden and his advisers and despite headwinds related to the financial crisis and Republican obstructionism, Obama wanted to carry out the reform. The confirmation of the reform by the Supreme Court on Thursday is historic. By spreading the risk of insurers among a larger pool of insured and by daring to speak of the solidarity of all Americans, in a land where individualism is sacrosanct, the Democratic administration induced a philosophical upheaval.

READ ON IN ENGLISH OR FRENCH, AND READ CONTINUING GLOBAL REACTION TO THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT DECISION AT WORLDMEETS.US, your most trusted translator and aggregator of foreign news and views about our nation.

Donate to The Moderate Voice

Share This

Related Posts

Sponsors

468 ad

1 Comment

  1. slamfu
    June 29, 2012 | 11:25 am

    I love how this is an Obama victory that he gets the credit for because it broke his way. If Roberts had voted the other way it would have been a huge failure by Obama. Even though the outcome was never in his hands. That fact that Obama was going to be considered a better or worse leader based on the decision made by Roberts is astounding to me. This type of thinking is one I try to avoid in anyone that works for me. That the outcome of the event says whether you approached it right or wrong.

    I have always been of the opinion that you decide on a goal, get all the facts you can, come up with a plan, and execute. A good plan is a good plan whether or not fate screws you over and it doesn’t work out. A bad plan is a bad plan even if it breaks your way. For instance, taking your kids college money and going to vegas, betting it all on one toss of the craps dice is a REALLY BAD IDEA, even if the toss comes up 7 and you double your money in a heartbeat. Just because it worked out does not mean what you did makes you a good financial planner.

    But politics doesn’t work this way. Whether or not SCOTUS allowed it, national healthcare is a priority, and Obama having tried to meet the GOP in the middle with the mandate concept was the best he could do given the GOP would have tanked a tax version of it. Blocking this law would have been a reflection of failure on the part of the GOP and SCOTUS, not Obama.