I know, I know. The current Senate health care bill is a watered down disappointment. In fact, it can reasonably be called a piece of crap. Then there are those who point out that bad as it is, it contains quite a few positive elements and thus the debate swirls--kill it because it doesn't do what is needed and pass it because it is at least a "step forward."
I am at least heartened by the hissy fit thrown by Mitch McConnell, which tells me we ought to pass it just to see his head explode. But what if it is killed? Then the Republican effort to give Obama his "Waterloo" is realized and most likely another full-blown effort for health care reform will not come for at least another fifteen years.
IF this turkey is passed, we may have openings to go forward from here that would not exist if it is killed.
Yes, I think the current bill is indeed a turkey--especially in terms of the abortion provisions. However, I am willing to support it's being passed by the Senate and going to conference. I would encourage everyone to give extremely close scrutiny to what comes out of conference. If, for example, it does not mitigate the unacceptable abortion restrictions, I would say kill it.
But consider this.
The bill contains a large number of desirable features--no pre-existing conditions, no lifetime caps, no rescission, etc. that are essential to health care reform but could not be included in a bill that was passed via reconciliation. If we can get those through in the regular manner by cloture, then maybe other more desirable features that were stripped from this bill can be passed by reconciliation.
The two most significant features--public option and medicare buy in--definitely affect the budget and can be included in a reconciliation effort. The other features in the current bill cannot. So why not pass those features (depending on what comes out of conference) by the 60 vote BS rules and then once those are passed run the other big things -- public options and medicare buy in--by way of reconciliation and the get the whole enchilada?
Of course, this scenario presupposes that the Democrats have the cajones to do such a thing, which is the one condition I am not sure of--but what if . . . . ?