Economic reform and health care reform were both focal points outlined in President Obama's policy agenda, with increasing pressure to address economic and social insecurity given that President Obama entered office during the Great Recession (2007-09). The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (commonly known as 'Obamacare') successfully passed in March 2010 in the context of the economic crisis. We argue that the strategic framing of the economic crisis, through reasoning and arguments linking health care reform with economic downfall, is important in understanding the successful passage of Obamacare, and that this is reflected through strategic frames in speeches delivered by the President on health care reform. Health care reform has been successful not in spite of but rather because of the economic crisis of 2008, that allowed President Obama to use a strategic frame focusing on costs and economic problems. The two main frames identified are the 'market' and 'rights' frames. President Obama's strategic frames specifically surrounding the economic and cost-containment priority of health care reform are categorized as a 'market' frame in this article. He used this frame until the passage of the law in 2010, when the frame shifted to 'rights' frames, largely portrayed through anecdotes and focused on the concept of 'access' to care rather than the 'cost' of care. This is observable through tracking speeches and statements made in support of health care reform between 2009 and 2013.

No abstract

No abstract

Regionalization tendencies have often been regarded, in academic and political debates, as a serious challenge for Canadian federalism and the national unity of Canada. This article argues that regionalism-and increased regionalization processes in the context of neoliberal globalization tendencies-is not a contradictory force that threatens federalism and national unity, but that it is and has historically been a decisive feature of Canadian civic nationalism from the beginning of the nation-building project. As a consequence, and for better or worse, processes of devolution under the current politico-economic regime will stabilize Canadian national unity rather than undermine it: regionalization can strengthen civic nationalism in Canada by adding a cultural dimension as a vehicle that negotiates between individual citizens, identity groups, and state institutions. Regionalisms-such as Québécois nationalism-are malleable structures of belonging and provide institutional frameworks (e.g., informal constitutions) and forums of dialogue that enrich the political culture of federalism. We conclude that increased regionalization can help to strengthen Canadian (and other forms of) civic nationalism by preventing them from slipping into monistic unitarism.