Jason Rees wrote:
While I'm in favor of the changes, it's ridiculous that it's taken six years longer than it should have to get this out there.
Welcome to the world of Congressional pork and earmarking.
Many pieces of legislation made it through Congress recently - including and especially the repeal of DADT - by allowing the legislation to stand on its own rather than be a parasitic add-on to other legislation. By cleaning up the legislative efforts, it was possible to clean up the pork and call to question the most effective way to implement said legislation.
Part of my current job is to conduct randomized, controlled trials of health care interventions. We're no longer accepting expert opinion as a proxy for evidence-based care. Instead we're measuring whether and how things really work when well-intentioned but sometimes misguided interventions are executed. It appears from reading about this legislation that the architects gave the process some much-needed scrutiny, resulting in better and less expensive legislation in the end. And that IMO is a sign of government working as it should as opposed to business as usual.
Gridlock sometimes does get things accomplished.