This article falls pretty firmly on the administration's side, to the point that it doesn't really consider any factual arguments against the bill, but it does provide a comprehensive list of new legal requirements that have just come into effect.

a) The article didn’t explain the complexities of the issue as well as it could have. For example, it could have given a short description on the “Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act” within the article. It is a link, but some readers may be deterred from reading the information if it is not in the article itself. Kevin Sack also probably should have further explained points he goes further in depth with, such as premiums. b) The article did offer an in depth understanding of the issue. It explains the previous health care issues. (People were dropped from their health care if they were too costly, although other excuses were made). It also explains the changes made to the health care system, and ... More »

I would say that overall this article is a good example of journalism. For one the article has a plethora of sources that convey all sides of the topic of debate, health insurance. The writer, Kevin Sack, did a good job at not letting his personal views on the subject matter project through his writing. I for one appreciated the fact that he made an attempt to include not just facts about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, but also the affect of how this Act will take on the American economy. Mr. Sack made sure to to include quotes from significant people in the government like President Obama and Minority Leader, John Boehner. I thought the article did a great job explaining what exactly the Patient Protection and ... More »

1. Yes, the article presented the reader with an understanding of the recent policy changes regarding health care reform under The Obama Administration. It also discussed the differences between the Democratic and Republican ideology and views on the topic of health care reform. In terms of complexities of the issues, the article showed the projected effects of the law. 2.The article was somewhat vague in its presentation and ability to provide for a depth of understanding regarding the subject matter. The first part of the article, was rather informative by providing the facts regarding the issues before shifting into the disapproval of these changes by the Republican party. 3.The article didn’t clarify any questions ... More »