With all due respect, however, you are mistaken about the work of Obama. For example Obamacare. What was it like in front of Obamacare? Americans did not get ANY HEALTH INSURANCE; because they had pre-illnesses; or because their illness was too expensive.
Do you know Sicko by Michael Moore?
Into this you can see that the health system doesn't work before; and how people lose all their money because they got ill.
And Michael Moore traveled to Canada, France and Great Britain and also to Cuba. And the health system was better than in the USA everywhere.
The health insurance companies are paid about the tax here in Germany and I have only low extra payment costs. At chronic illnesses 1% to pay, or else 2%. The health insurance company pays costs which furthermore go.
A preelection promise has adhered to Obama, for that most Americans are grateful. Namely 40 million Americans who can be insured now.
I have to disagree with you.
Indeed, I've seen Sicko. His argument was extremely flawed and was even countered by multiple sources.
To begin, Health Insurance is something that should be reevaluated. However, it wasn't due to too few regulations--it was due to too many regulations. For instance, Health Insurance was introduced in about 1910. It was just a measurement of risk. It was left to private contract to decide what the individual wanted to cover in order to customize his care and finances. It wasn't until about 1970 that Third Party Payer was introduced. This was one of the worst things that was done because it increased the premiums and caused for an even larger regulation. The insurers weren't the ones that wanted to initiate post-existence of illness, it was federal regulation. Because of this, the insurers had to increase the cost in order to finance, otherwise they wouldn've sunk.
The case for Canada, France, the UK and Cuba are very different, but have a lot of draw-backs.
1) Cuba. Cuba's healthcare is funded by government (meaning private citizens). The capital gained in Cuba is massively low, and it's due to the lack of private enterprise. Public operation can't create capital other than fiat currency--and all that does is inflate the currency. Because of this, Cuba's quality of health care has been falling more and more. Sicko's illustration was that of rare private care for tourists and the wealthy. The majority of their hospitals are in poor conditions. The children who are born with certain problems (retardation, abnormalities, etc.) are often aborted by the insistence of the doctors--and then those who have been aborted are not recorded as ever having been alive. This is why many Cubans are incredibly dissatisfied with their medical system. This is common in a Communist society. This is what my grandparents escaped in Soviet Russia.
2) France, the UK, and Canada.
On one hand, their taxes almost seemed balanced and they don't seem to mind paying these taxes toward health care. Americans could protest for this, however, the problem is this: we have THIRD PARTY PAYER--Europe and Canada does not. Their measurement of risk is decided by their legislators. But also, that's one of the big problems...the value.
Europe and Canada don't seem to have a bad health care system. However, much of this is thanks top medical research in OTHER countries (the US being one of them). Many of the European countries, however, are very low in medical research. But that's also not the worst of it. The wait to see a doctor--or to even get treatment for certain emergencies can be between 4 months to 2 years. My wife's cousin in Spain had to wait 7 months in pain before he could get proper treatment for his problem. Animal Hospitals get excellent treatment in these countries, but because they are run by private contract, not by public funding and regulation.
My experience in working with the National Institutes of Health (6 1/2 years now), I've seen more reports of private research than public research (but the public research has to review the private to make sure they are abiding by law--often, they self-regulate despite law).
My wife is a medical biller. After Obamacare has been continuing, she has been receiving more and more calls from customers complaining about their premiums going up. And this is true. Obamacare 1) doesn't address Third Party Payer, 2) doesn't address over-regulation, and 3) forced people to pay for insurance--even if they already have it. It has lead to an increase of job loss, and increase of private practices closing shop, and a decrease of certain researchers.
This is a few years old, and not too descriptive, but Stossel did a decent job of illustrating the flaws that fell through the cracks. (I'm usually very iffy on mainstream media, but Stossel is one of the few journalists that reports what is often seen as fringe).
Most Americans are not grateful for this. In fact, the polls are suggesting that most aren't in favor of this, and even more are beginning to doubt it after they've noticed they are paying more. Though they've been sold that they won't be paying anything. What many people forget is that nothing is free. Subsidized health care isn't free--it is funded by taxation, and if there is more taxation and capital gains, the money will eventually run out. That is currently what is being stressed over in Spain, Italy, and was all over the news last year regarding Greece.
This is only one point about Obama...only one of the ten examples. Even if I were to grant you that Obamacare is a success (which it isn't--in fact, it's been looking like a failure even more--the website is constantly shutting down for example), then there are still 9 other listed reasons why Obama has been horrible. In fact, Bush was really bad, but Obama has been worse.