Regarding your suggested insertion, I think it goes into unnecessary detail: neutrality would require us to include rejoinders of similar length from opponents of the ACA, and that would transform the article into a proxy debate on the law's merits.
It goes into unnecessary detail. This is what i think regarding your suggested insertion. Neutrality would require us to include rejoinders of similar length from opponents of the ACA. That would transform the article into a proxy debate on the law's merits.