Here is the crux of Catron’s argument:
To some extent, however, Hogberg is allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good. It’s not without its problems, but Rudycare is vastly superior to anything put forward by the other Republican presidential candidates. And, goodness knows, it’s far better than anything we’re likely to get from Hillary.
So, despite the flaws that Hogberg so eloquently exposes, I’m still enthusiastic about “Hizzoner’s” plan.
However, to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, one has to be setting up the perfect as the standard, which I am not doing. Rather, it is the Mayor himself who has set the standard when he said, “The future of America’s healthcare system lies in free-market solutions, not socialist models.” How are the parts of his health care reform that expands government consistent with a “free-market solution”? They’re not.
No, one does not have to make the perfect the enemy the good to make a legitimate case that Rudy’s plan could be much, much better.