The article as it stands with or without Obamacare is definitely not neutral While many of the goals were laudable the controversial and irrelevant cruft that mostly fills the 2900 pages needs to be included in the description Start with the new taxes and fees Continue with a debate about death panels On balance the bill is a terrible implementation of the goals of health care reform And it shouldn t be called Obamacare not because that term might be seen as racist or pejorative It should be called Pelosicare because she and her staff wrote it