MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808341443 · doi:10.1111/1467-923x.12527

Obamacare in the Trump Era: Where are we Now, and Where are we Going?

2018· article· en· W2808341443 on OpenAlex
Daniel Béland, Philip Rocco, Alex Waddan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Political Quarterly · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical and Economic history of UK and US
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsRepealPresidencyOpposition (politics)PoliticsLegislatureRetrenchmentLegislationVetoPolitical sciencePublic administrationLawState (computer science)Political economyLaw and economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, is the most significant US social policy reform in half a century, and the most politically fractious. Since the law was signed by President Obama, Republicans have mobilised against it, using courts and state governments to undermine the implementation of the legislation, which was set to unfold gradually over a nine‐year period. As we describe in this article, however, the beginning of the Trump presidency in January 2017 marked a turning point in the politics of Obamacare. In the absence of Obama's veto, legislative retrenchment became a viable option for the first time. Yet, a combination of intra‐party conflict and opposition to repeal from key stakeholders doomed Republicans’ initial efforts. Nevertheless, we discuss several reasons to doubt Obamacare's political stability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it