Obamacare is an historic achievement, but as I've argued in The Nation, the law remains unpopular, partly because the evolution of its provisions are not understood, but mainly because insured people can't be bothered to care about people without insurance. Now comes the Times arguing that the "Doctor Shortage Likely to Worsen With Health Law," which gives one the impression that, for some reason, the law will lead to fewer doctors and less care.
Actually, all the article shows is that, with more poor people insured--making claims on health services they could not afford before--the proportion of doctors to the number of potential patients decreases. No kidding. Come to think of it, the existence of scholarships "worsens" the shortage of places in the Ivy League. The article is itself pernicious because it seems to imply a general hit to the commonwealth when the commonwealth is in fact becoming fairer. I would like to believe that somebody at the Times is simply asleep, and the impression will soon be corrected.