The CBO addresses financial impact only, not the social changes. Not quite their forte, I'd say.1. The complete social changes that will occur with the implementation of the ACA can't be known simply by reading the bill. You'd have to read up on the CBO's scoring of the bill and other sources to fully understand that.
I've discussed the bill in more places than here, and interestingly enough argued points of it with people it doesn't affect. Talk about an unbiased view from them, lol.2. Incorrect. I have studied up on all the major aspects of the law, have read dozens of sources over the entire debate, some opinion based, many factual, about the legislation. I understand it as well or better than anyone I've met on Debate Politics that I've run into. You can say that I don't, and that would be your opinion, but we both know that you don't care about opinions, so you are kind of stuck in a conundrum there. You don't just get to declare someone ignorant on a topic. You'd have to show that somehow. So when you find me spreading incorrect information about the bill, please point it out. Otherwise you are just saying that my arguments are weak simply because I haven't read the bill. It's my opinion that we should actually base arguments on the strength of them, not on who they came from. So you can say my position is very weak, and that's your opinion, but it means precisely dick.
I've yet to figure out what 'dick' does mean, in this connotation...
Oh, I found one I'd been looking for, this is the type of legislature I usually follow.
Seed Availability and Competition Act of 2013 (H.R. 193) - GovTrack.us