Apparently, none of them thinks it was a failure, because they reauthorized it (Obama signed the reauth in 2011). That law has always bothered me for the reason that there's no possible way it was written in response to 9/11, as it it something like a 350 page bill with all sorts of complex clauses; it couldn't have been written in a month. They (both parties, as you suggest) were looking to pass this for a long time. Somethings I've read said that most of the law was written as far back as '99, but that nobody had the stones to bring such an assault on liberty to the floor, given the fact that they would be thrown out of office under normal circumstances. The reauthorization, without much protest from the public and with little reason to keep most of the provision in place anyway, proves the old adage that the gov't doesn't give back any power it's granted.Look, the stupid Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland security were a joint failure by Bush and the R's and D's in both houses.
We shall see. Like I said the other day, I'm willing to hold judgement (against my better judgement) for a few years. On a side note, two of the things in the health law that I foresee being the biggest disasters are 1) basing Medicare/caid reimbursements on patient satisfaction surveys, as everyone in healthcare knows that the malcontents are waaaay louder than the rest of us, and usually sicker, too; and 2) basing Medicare/caid reimbursements on readmission rates, as there is no way to control patient behavior once they leave the hospital. How do they envision this conversation going? Doctor: "Sir, you're severely diabetic, don't eat large amounts of sugar while continuing to get 0 exercise." Patient: "Oh wow, I never thought of it that way, thanks!" And everyone lives happily ever after.