THE WRONG WAY TO SHAKE UP CONGRESSEDITORIALNEW YORK TIMESPolitical entrenchment is a problem in a Congress where 90 percent of the districts are dominated by a single party and incumbents can often take their re-election for granted. Those who want to change that can better spend their money supporting nonpartisan redistricting in state legislatures. They can also oppose state attempts to limit voter turnout, and use their money to encourage voter registration and participation in both primary and general elections. And they can lay down the weapon of the super PAC, which gives corporations and the wealthy an outsized voice in campaigns. Attack ads, which are their stock in trade, are tainting the political process and turning off many voters. Unlimited political money breeds corruption and cynicism, and cannot produce a better government.
HURRAY FOR HEALTH REFORMBY PAUL KRUGMANNEW YORK TIMESHow would ObamaRomneycare change American health care? For most people the answer is, not at all…. The act is aimed, instead, at Americans who fall through the cracks, either going without coverage or relying on the miserably malfunctioning individual, “non-group” insurance market…. The solution — originally proposed, believe it or not, by analysts at the ultra-right-wing Heritage Foundation — is a three-legged stool of regulation and subsidies. …. As I said, the reform is mainly aimed at Americans who fall through the cracks in our current system — an important goal in its own right. But what makes reform truly urgent is the fact that the cracks are rapidly getting wider, because fewer and fewer jobs come with health benefits; employment-based coverage actually declined even during the “Bush boom” of 2003 to 2007, and has plunged since. What this means is that the Affordable Care Act is the only thing protecting us from an imminent surge in the number of Americans who can’t afford essential care. So this reform had better survive — because if it doesn’t, many Americans who need health care won’t.








