Harvard supported the law in the lofty, theoretical abstract, but when it applies to people, doesn't think it such a good thing after all. Well, actually, when it is applied to a specific group of people. You may have guessed it: the Harvard faculty!
Yes, according to the New York Times (also a champion of Obamacare), the members of the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences, voted "overwhelmingly to oppose changes that would require them and thousands of other Harvard employees to pay more for health care. The university says the increases are in part a result of the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act..." and, the story could add - 'They don't want to pay them!"
It takes a special brand of selfishness and dishonesty for folks to urge - no, to demand - that the public enjoy the benefits of this particular piece of legislation, yet try to weasel out of having the same law apply to themselves.
Congress and the Executive branch do this all the time - exempting themselves from laws that apply to everyone else - so we aren't surprised that the Harvard faculty expects the same treatment. But does not their present opposition to the law in operation undercut the arguments they made on behalf of the law in theory? And does it not add credence to the arguments against the law made by others, who correctly predicted the disaster that Obamacare was fated to be?