I don't disagree; there have been lots of good Republican-backed health care plans in the states (the ACA was modeled on one). But the NATIONAL party has failed to embrace any good cost control mechanisms. Unfortunately, most of their proposed solutions involve reining in costs by cutting benefits, kicking people off the programs, or allowing insurers to continue discriminating on the basis of preexisting conditions. Right now the best cost-control mechanism we have for health care is the ACA...which was opposed by every single Republican in Congress, with the cost control measures generating the staunchest opposition of all.2. Republicans have done good work in the states doing the same. See: Indiana's HSA's for public workers and Medicaid recipients
I responded to this in the other thread...none of these points are correct.3. The ACA only "reduces the deficit" if you think you can spend the same $500 Billion twice, that unemployment is currently at 7.5%, growth is currently at 4%, and the Congress will not pass the doc fix bill. CBO said as long as you collect 10 years of taxes and only pay out 6 years of benefits, and you do the above mentioned things, you can get it to not raise the deficit.
Recession-related spending naturally causes the deficit to explode; the tax base shrinks, unemployment and social security payments grow, various one-shot measures like stimulus bills and TARP are enacted, etc. None of these things continue on their own.4. No, the "short term" increases in discretionary spending (which rose quickly under Bush and rose much much faster under Obama) have merely established a "new baseline." nowhere in his budgets has Obama called for reducing the size of the federal government back down to 19-20% of GDP
Were the economic conditions the same in both situations? I'm less interested in the deficit over the period of a few years during a recession, than I am in the long-term structural deficit facing the country. Moreover, let's look at the bigger picture.5. Democrats have indeed been the more profligate spenders - compare the budgets that came out after they took the House to those before hand.