While it is good in the sense that it brings awareness to the consumer on either side that their ideas need reevaluation and further study, I don't think I would call it excellent; it's mostly fluff, and tends to apoglogetic, regarding the administration/act.
It boldly states that no group has been able to prove that the act has been misused, but neglects to point out that the nature of the act legally- and under strict penalty - prohibits any such reporting, unless it comes out of the internal review board. As well, one could very well quibble about what qualifies as misuse. I seem to remember a story by a guy who worked for doctors without borders about his experience in a NY restaurant some time ago... certainly that was not the last nor most egregious abuse of the power this act brings.
"Critics, who have tried to cast Ashcroft as a conservative zealot..."
Uh, no. Ashcroft has cast himself in this starring role.