A minute of research has led me to conclude the discussed limit which comes from the 1997 Balanced Budget Act[1] was, like most of these sorts of efforts, passed by a Republican controlled Congress with weak opposition from Democrats. Republicans in the House voted 219 for and 7 against with Democrats 51 for and 154 against[2]. There was even less resistance in the Senate with 52 Republicans for with 3 against and 21 Democrats for and 24 against[3]. OP's "suspicion" was not "unfounded" and there was in fact "one party... driving this policy more than the other." If your complaint is simply that OP speculated on this without evidence, you're just as guilty of flagging their comment based on your own speculation without any evidence.

[1] - https://www.cms.gov/priorities/innovation/files/migrated-med...

[2] - https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/1997241

[3] - https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/105-1997/s130

I’ll take it. I’ll take the flag. My comment was cynical and unfounded in the kind of discourse that we should see on HN. I will not edit it either. For posterity, I was thinking of the recent cutbacks to prevent “waste, fraud and abuse”, which, coming from a senator, should have been grounded in an even higher standard, rather than walking away from requests for clarification.