Why Obamacare Might Actually Happen

Jon Cohn over at TNR has a pretty good article explaining how and why Obamacare might actually get passed in 2009.

But it's more than new money these groups are bringing to the table. It's also a new attitude. It's easy to forget now, but in the run-up to the Clinton fight most of Washington--indeed, most of the United States--thought health care reform was inevitable. Pro-reform interest groups approached the debate in the same way, focusing relentlessly on their narrow interests. This time around, nobody takes reform for granted. "Groups are coming in with less of an attitude that it's our way or no way," says one staffer who's been present for some of the discussions. "What we're getting from these stakeholders is, we want something to happen, we know you won't do it just the way we recommend, but we want to be positive and we to be there with you."

Not coincidentally, the same attitude seems to be prevailing among members of Congress. In 1994, reformers were fervent but seemed unable to agree on what reform should be. A sizable block wanted to create a single-payer, government- run system; another group favored a system based on private insurance, like the Clintons were proposing; a third group didn't even want to pursue universal coverage. This time around, many traditional single-payer proponents have indicated they could get behind a proposal like Obama's because it would at least offer people the option of a government-run plan and, perhaps, evolve into a single-payer system someday. Meanwhile, the bill attracting centrist interest, Wyden's, is far more ambitious than its 1994 counterparts. Among other things, it would cover virtually everybody right away, something even Obama's own proposal wouldn't accomplish.

It's a good read, and speaking of what Obama can do to get this issue passed fast, BooMan takes a smart look at what the Dems can do to shuffle chairmanships and to create a pair of special committees in Congress to get things done on the universal health care front.

All of the proposed members of these hypothetical special committees are experienced, high-ranking, members in the field of health care. The three biggest and longest advocates of universal health care (Dingell, Kennedy, and Clinton) would all be in a position to take credit. Waxman would be situated to take over energy issues, but Dingell would be well compensated. Clinton would get recognition for both her historic primary campaign and her willingness to campaign for Obama. Kennedy could live to see his greatest desire fulfilled and Baucus would not get unjustly cut out of the deal. Finally, Lieberman would have a prominent role and something to take home to his constituents, but he'd also be punished for siding with McCain.

Obama's very much like myself: a terribly pragmatic guy. I can see him going for this type of arrangement very early, and doing something even better than "spreading the wealth":

Spreading the credit.