[agar]

Credit where credit is due. It was bipartisan legislation that was signed into law by Trump.

Rollout and re-regulation was very slow, with additional hearing aids being made available over the next few years but with the FDA seemingly maintaining a fairly strong regulatory hand.

The Biden administration pushed the FDA to fully implement the law and gave a 120-day deadline. I'm sure work was already in progress, but the FDA pushed and met the deadline which brings us to today.

IMO this is a case where politics worked. Biden gets a "win" by touting this as more affordable healthcare and helping the middle class. Trump will I'm sure take credit for signing it into law, and republicans will highlight it as a win for deregulation.

In the end though, this should be an unvarnished good for millions with hearing impairment that can't afford hearing aids, but also for many companies who can now innovate without onerous FDA testing requirements.

[dec0dedab0de]

Interesting that the two oldest presidents are united on hearing aids.

[Nextgrid]

I wouldn't read too much into this considering they have enough money to even commission themselves a one-off, fully-custom design if they wanted to.

[scarface74]

> Credit where credit is due. It was bipartisan legislation that was signed into law by Trump.

I was never a Trump supporter for reasons. But I was disappointed in him nonetheless.

I thought Trump, not being beholden to the traditional powers that be and having followers that would literally get arrested for him, would be able to bully his way into getting things done that he supported that no other Republican could.

He spoke out publicly against the drug companies and their prices and wanted up front pricing from the medical industry, believed in criminal justice reform (along with Rand Paul and the Koch brothers), and a few other measures I agree with.

But he let his petty grievances get in the way.

Yes I am well aware that the architects of the mess that criminal Justice is on the federal level was spearheaded by Clinton and Biden back in the day.

[lisper]

> would be able to bully his way into getting things done that he supported that no other Republican could.

And he did. He got Roe overturned (with an assist from Mitch McConnell).

[scarface74]

He didn’t care about abortion. He was pro choice most of his life. That was clearly a pandering move and now he is being criticized by the anti abortion crowd because he said he doesn’t think there should be a federal ban.

[welshwelsh]

Republicans used Trump to overturn Roe. Trump himself didn't care at all about abortion and was nominally pro-choice until he decided to run for president

The stuff Trump wanted to do himself he had much less success with.

[flavius29663]

Trump forced hospital to publish prices, no? https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/15/trump-releases-rule-requirin...

Also, he did free a lot of federal inmates https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/589600-thousands...

[scarface74]

It looks like I was wrong. He never really embraced criminal Justice reform sincerely. He thought it would make inroads with minorities and he had to be convinced by his son in law (https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/01/trump-republicans-f...).

That isn’t by itself meant to be a criticism. But politically, he couldn’t even fight the rhetoric from the right.

And I didn’t know the transparency rule ever made it through.

But, he didn’t get a law passed. It was administrative meaning it would be easier to fight in court (which is happening) and another administration could overturn it.

Again, with his political clout over his base, he could have brow beat enough Republicans and the Democrats wouldn’t dare oppose it. He didn’t focus his energy on getting laws passed in support of the parts of his agenda that’s traditionally not conservative.

[Aloha]

Everything with Trump is a transaction, literally everything - so in that process some good things happen, because most of the people in the process - everyone but Trump are at least by some amount of measure, rational actors.

He didnt spend time getting laws passed because he couldn't figure out how to wrap his transactional thinking into a larger program designed to accomplish things - in his mind every deal is a one off, and it cant really merge deals into a larger direction.

[flavius29663]

I always thought that Trump is not a good builder, I just couldn't put my finger on it. I think this is it, the thinking of everything as transactions with immediate effects.

Let's be honest, all politicians think at transactions, but he might be lacking a strong internal belief, to help him tie some not so great transactions for "the greater good".

[Aloha]

I dont think most politicians are all transactional, but I do think that willing to think about certain issues in a transactional way or willing to use transactions in certain deals helps you achieve your agenda. But you need to be willing to call that favor chit back in later, and able to think about the issues in a longer term way.

I worry about politicians who think about things in an excessively ideological eye, because the ideologues are immune compromising.

[dkarras]

dude, he was and is batsh*t insane. you are listing things he would / could do like he was a rational actor that really cared about anything.

[judge2020]

You cannot be disappointed in this system which you know is blatantly just a "win voters by any means necessary" reward system. The laws that matter (and the laws that take away your freedom) will get passed with no publicity since there is no political divide, but you'll only remember the laws that the X political party sees as important to winning over/taking voters since these always get the most news coverage.