this is what is so frickin' frustrating about the dems loss of nerve and the administration's failure of leadership.

there should have been a bill ready for obama to sign prior to the state of the union in order to enjoy the knock-on effects.

having failed that, it's still essential to get the house dems in line, pass the senate bill, do some changes in reconciliation, and get this done.

the failure of nerve and of outcome cannot possibly help the democrats one bit: it reinforces every carter-era cliche about weakness - in spades. it is driving every single motivated progressive i know insane with rage and disgust, which cannot possibly help.

the argument for obama was a return of intelligence to oval office policymaking. the response since the brown defeat has been such as to call into question just how smart the team is.

The Dems find themselves in this position, after enjoying strong public support for a robust healthcare initiative with a public option, because they let the Republicans roll them, just like always. The only thing that makes this situation different is that the GOP showed it can do it even with small numbers.

Republicans simply brayed day and night that the American People did not like or want the Democrats' plan; and, even though that was not true, nobody on the Democratic side stood up to point that out, so it became true. Simple as that. Politics in an alternate reality.

Democrats might as well decide that today is as good as any other time to die. What's the point of politics if it's only your survival that matters? To what end does your survival serve a larger purpose? Please, Democrats. Life is not fair or easy. We won't get credit for doing the right thing but that's not the point. Do it anyway. Please.

To be still screwing around at this late date is just sickening.

The poll misses an essential factor - what if the bill that were passed had some fixes to the Senate bill in it? The bill is unpopular with the left because it is the Senate bill. The poll should be redone to ask about this rock and a hard place instead: pass nothing or pass health care with a public option (through reconciliation).

My Blue Cross premium just went from $430 to $560 per month. That's just for moi. No dental, no vision.

If anybody thinks passing the damn BAD Senate bill will bring the Democratic faithful out to vote in November, you haven't been paying attention to the recent elections.

this is the point at which i'm amazed at the capacity of some to endure the stench while still poking around for the pony...

Democratic legislators should ask themselves: why are Republicans so dead set to boycotting their efforts to pass a Health Care Reform?

The answer is obvious: because they know passing one would be a *positive* factor for Dems electoral chances.

It's that clear to Republicans, why can't they see it?

News flash, Joe Friday: lots of us think that.

Er...ah...whichevah way the wind blows, let it nevah be said that I do not also blow.

I agree with Mr. Benen that unappreciated dynamics could appear with a *victory* in HCR. But damn those poll numbers are depressing. I think Mark is right:

"Republicans simply brayed day and night that the American People did not like or want the Democrats' plan [...] so it became true"

Apparently, a majority of voters are grumpy people. Claims that "government is incompetent" or corrupt, or power hungry resonate easily. Claims that business (banks, corporations, CEOs) is incompetent/corrupt also go down easy.

Dems need to spend some political capital to educate voters on the benefits and necessity of government action, particularly as a check against business power.

More importantly: this is the right thing to do. Lets assume Dems will lose if they pass it and lose if they don't pass it. Why not lose, BUT DELIVER THE THING YOU WANTED TO DO IN THE FIRST PLACE, versus losing and achieving nothing. Health care will be on the books for generations if we pass it. It's not just about this election cycle.

This is simple cowardice. It may be the first time we've seen pols refusing to do something the public so obviously wants. This is the easiest sell on earth--"If you get sick you won't go bankrupt".

Who is talking to them in the back rooms? It can't be only pharma lobbyists.

@flubber: I don't think it's so much that government is _incompetent_. The question is, how much control over your life do you want to give the government? Remember, just because the Dems have a majority now, doesn't mean that will always be true.

Take the Stupak amendment, for example. If it holds, the right of women to get abortions paid by insurance will be severely at risk - and that's with an overwhelming Democratic majority! Do you really think that would be better if and when the Republicans get control?

It's far safer to let the government be a check on the excesses of business power, than to give it too much power of its own.

And Mr. Benen, I am not so sure how useful that poll could be. Right now, anybody who likes the bill is hardly going to vote GOP if it fails, whereas anybody who dislikes it is not going to be willing to vote Democratic if they abandon it. But some months from now, if it is unpopular (as the polls seem to indicate), passing it in its current form gives the GOP a major issue to hammer the Democrats with, while if it is allowed to die, the easy counter will be, "we heard you and backed off."

"This is simple cowardice. It may be the first time we've seen pols refusing to do something the public so obviously wants."

According to polls, something like 70% of the public is opposed to the current HCR bills.

As for the idea that passing the bill would at least give Congressional democrats a positive achievement to campaign on, this is seriously misguided. First, if the public is 70% opposed, then these candidates would be much better off by getting off the topic of HCR completely and onto some issue where their polling numbers aren't nearly as disasterous.

Second, part of what's killing democrats nationally is the anger over their continuing to push Obamacare in the face of overwhelming popular opposition. At some point, people expect their elected officials to vote in accordance with the public's wishes, even if the elected officials think the public is wrong. Passing the bill with the idea of then going and selling it to the voters is only going to turn off people more.

The scenario you describe as "a hard place" is precisely what happened to Clinton. The Republicans killed his reform plan, attacked him for it anyway, and jeered at him as being ineffectual, and it won them control of Congress. We all know the definition of insanity as doing the same thing over and over, hoping for a different result. Let's hope there are enough sane Democrats to get this done.

The idea that Democrats should pass the bill in order to give themselves something positive to campaign on makes less and less sense the more I think about it. Suppose instead of HCR, we were talking about a proposed Democratic bill calling for the shooting of cute little puppies. Let's say the public was outraged by such legislation, with only a small minority of folks in support. In the face of such overwhelming opposition, would you advocate the passing of such a bill just to enable Dem candidates to try to change the minds of some of the people who were previously against shooting puppies? Of course not. Politically, sure, you're probably DOA just for supporting the bill in the first place. But to improve your standing, your best chances would involve some combination of (1) running away from the puppy-shooting bill, and (2) not talking about the puppy-shooting bill, i.e., moving on to something else. The only reason you'd go ahead and pass the bill would not be to try to enhance your electoral prospects, but because you really wanted to see a lot of puppies killed.

Conrad, the first rule of analogies is that they be analogous. yours is not.

democrats have been running in one way or another for 60 years on full public access to insurance. they achieved the incremental gain of medicare the last time they had the votes. this was the time to complete the job. shooting frickin' puppies has nothing to do with anything.

more broadly, the democrats failure of nerve here is showing that they can't deliver the goods: this will further weaken them electorally, not strengthen them.

as for the polling data: i don't like this bill. i could imagine many better bills. the negative polling data picks up many people like me. but this is the bill that can pass, now, and should.

the fact is, even a majority of scott brown's voters support the mass plan, and that's a useful piece of polling data....

Just maybe someone could look past 2010. OK. It doesn't matter for 2010. But what about after that? If the plan succeeds, won't it help the Democrats enormously for a long time?

Speaking of bad analogies, it's a mistake to compare the present situation involving Obamacare to the situation the led to passage of Medicare. Medicare was a popular measure that passed the Senate with 70 votes and the House with 307. Part of the reason for its popularity was that, as of 1965, the public had not felt the bankrupting effects such large-scale entitlement programs, combined with demographic changes, can bring. We ARE experiencing those effects today, and the public is considerably more troubled by the risks and potential consequences of a massive new government program than in the current fiscal environment -- in which Medicare itself is a major concern -- than by the fact that a small fraction of American citizens are without health insurance.

I'm not really trying to debate the merits of HCR, just the current political reality. Obamacare is really, really unpopular. Trying to justify its enactment it by reference to Medicare makes no sense, because Medicare wasn't unpopular at all. As it turned out, Medicare hasn't done a thing to reduce the overall costs of HC for old folks (still 20% of their incomes), but at the time, voters didn't know it would end up being so expensive for everyone involved.

If the Administration made half an effort to explain to people what is actually in the bill, the “damage [that has been] done” can readily be undone if a bill is passed. That goes double if, as IndigoJoe says, an amendment making popular changes desired by most Democrats, including a public option, is an integral part of the process. Such effort has been 98% missing.

Obama never seems to fail to miss an opportunity to explain the bill to the American people. He could have taken five or ten minutes with a national audience of tens of millions of voters to “make it perfectly clear” what the Senate bill “does and does not do” -- and how specifically it would affect ordinary Americans in the short-term as well as lay a necessary foundation for long-term economic recovery -- instead of the 45-second-or-so summary litany he did. It is hard to believe this great communicator doesn’t get this. Where are the commercials explaining how premiums will be reduced by subsidies for the majority of Americans -- or explaining any other benefits and debunking the ridiculous attacks?

Meanwhile, as he is seeming to keep the faith alive by asking the public to keep the pressure on, he sends Rahm Emanuel out to weaken any remaining momentum, and adds his own little kicker by saying we should pass a bill “this year” -- somehow thinking we will forget the demand that it be done by August, and the promises of every Democratic leader that it would be done “this year” in 2009. He’s telling us to wait another year, which really means, because Democrats will get killed in November and will lose majorities in favor of reform, period, it will be killed, period.

It’s sitting there like a big fat hanging curve ball for the House. They can vote the Senate bill and at the same time go on record for their Democratic base in November by voting an amendment with the changes they want it to have, especially for a public option. That they don’t swing at this big fat pitch tells me they are being told not to. Why they are being told not to is unclear, since it is patently obvious that putting the Senate bill into law, passing an amendment with fanfare to put pressure on the Senate majority to do the same in reconciliation, and mounting a big education campaign to improve public opinion around is the only chance for recovery in November. The only rationale I can see is that someone important in the White House does not want it to happen -- guess who -- and the only reason I can speculate for that is that a secret deal was made with the industry, with Obama’s approval, of course, to kill the public option at all costs. A House amendment resurrecting the public option -- very popular when understood -- would be tough to resist by the Senate majority and the man who would sign it into law, all of whom have repeatedly claimed to want it all along.

Hate to be this cynical, and would love to be proved wrong, but there have been too many strange things happening along the way to discount it.

I think @urban legend has it right about the House. They should do it and economists have been saying today, in response to the budget bill, that the economy is toast with the reform. Pass it. Just do it. We can't afford not to economically or politically. The cost not doing so will go much higher than seats in the 2010 midterms, also politically (to the left) as well as economically.

@Bernard: But how can it succeed? More precisely: how can it succeed with the vast majority of Americans who are already satisfied with the HC they have (or lack of insurance, in the case of those young people who don't carry insurance)? What do they get out of it? A massive new government entitlement, no real mechanisms to rein in overall costs, the prospects of rationing in one form or the other, higher taxes, less freedom (in terms of the mandate and the fact the feds will control the contents of health insurance plans).

Sure, if you are one of the currently uninsured who will become eligible for govt-subsidized health insurance, Obamacare probably looks better than what you got now (although maybe not if the subsidies don't sufficiently cover the costs of the insurance they'll be forced to buy). But for MOST people, as Obama himself said, they look at this and ask, what's in it for me?

You're all wrong.

Next November is 10 months away. That's several political lifetimes and about 17,978 news cycles from now.

In between, Scott Brown will gridlock the Senate, an already unpopular congress won't get anything accomplished, and republicans will continue to bray about debt, taxes, and security.

Pass HCR now because it won't matter 10 months from now. Democrats need to start driving a wedge . Hit the Senate with financial regulatory reform hard and fast. Period. Put those m*therf*ckers on their heels for a change. It's time for Democrats to bray about the financial mess those greedy corrupt banks got us into. Bush bailed them out with TARP. Bush era deregulation helped create it. Now that the economy has been stabilized, it's time for commissions, investigations, and consequences. The public wants a witch hunt and Dems should give them one.

Then, before Nov., sneak reconciliation changes to HCR thru that makes it more palatable to the left (Add public option, subtract Stupak) and to centrists (get rid of the Nebraska/Louisiana kickbacks). November will look a whole lot different 10 months from now.

Actually, healthcare plan "oppose/favor" is about 51/38:

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php

That's not great, but it's also NOT decisive -- since it's only a 13-point spread, after OVER A HALF-YEAR of steady Fox/Limbaugh misinformation about it.

The hard Right was always against it, so this spread is made up of the independents who don't like the sausagemaking + some progressives who are angry that there is not a public option.

If it is passed very soon, and Obama mounts a full Q&A information campaign about the bill, then emotions will subside in 3 months (as they always do,) and the Dems will retain both houses of Congress.

If they don't pass the healthcare bill, then the lies about it will continue, and the Dems won't get any financial reform, either.

Because the Dems won't have completed any other legislation to prove their competence to any potential voter -- while the Repubs will remain in simple "OBSTRUCT" mode in any case.

So the only way forward for anyone who wants a better country is to get the health bill passed, so people can learn the finalized details of it.

And if they don't pass the health bill, a lot of Dem voters including some moderate Dems will stay home in November.

P.S. Here's another prediction: If the Dems screw this up and the Repubs get control of government over the next few years, then the Repubs will end up passing essentially the SAME bill.

It is, after all, a bipartisan document with about 30 years of well-argued ideas already in it. The Repubs will pass it, because the healthcare system is bankrupting the country, and it is going to start affecting our international competitiveness.

Free trade means consumers can find the cheapest costs. The time will come when no one buys U.S. goods and services because the U.S. labor is paying 40% more in healthcare costs. Right now, the Repubs are just playing politics to get control of Congress. Wake up, people!

A significant majority of voters polled were in favour of HCR with a public option. That was before the Republican noise machine started up with death panels, pulling the plug on Grandma and Government choosing your doctor for you. For people who assume it's their God-given right to rule the world, Americans are easily frightened, not to mention distracted (Ooooo, shiny!).

Mulling over which would be the best course of action for Democrats appears to assume things will stay as they are right now. However, if they pass nothing, will the Republicans content themselves with smug smiles because they managed to kill reform? What about history would suggest that? Of course not - they will hammer the "Do-Nothing Democrats" to a pulp.

There is no upside to letting things ride, and then blaming the Republicans for destroying a good initiative, because Republicans have already convinced the ignorant public that it is a bad initiative. Howard is correct in his assessment. The only chance is to pass something, and then talk over Republicans who will scream that Democrats sold out Americans. The voters will believe that it is unaffordable and the first stages of a government takeover until they see for themselves that it is not. That will never happen if it doesn't get to see the light of day. They will believe that Republicans saved America.

Have a look at Pollster's combined poll graph, here it is again:

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php

You'll see something very interesting:

Over the last month (about 24 different polls,) "Favor" has dropped -- but "Oppose" has NOT increased. (In fact "Oppose" shows a very slight drop.) What we're seeing is a lot of uncertainty.

The Republican meme that healthcare reform is political death for the Dems come Nov. is nonsense -- it is a scare tactic. Just pass the damn bill, now.

The 70% opposed number I mentioned was based on this CNN poll:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/26/cnn-poll-half-say-start-anew-on-health-care-bill/?fbid=0ZIYw0Xj5FA

Bottom line: Only 30% say pass the current bill; 48% say start over; and 21% say do nothing.

Is no one here troubled by the idea of passing something this massive AGAINST the great weight of popular opinion, if not out of electoral concerns, then just on principle? I get that we're a republic, not a true democracy, but at some point shouldn't elected officials defer to what the people want?

I have concluded that the Dims are too stupid and cowardly to do what's best for the country. They have continuously allowed the bat-shit crazy wing of the rethuglican party to frame the issue.

Healthcare reform was DOA when Reid let Baucus slow-walk it through his committee.

I think it is obvious that Democratic rank and file are going to be more motivated to go to the polls in November if HCR has passed or if every effort has been made to get it passed.

conrad, as i never tire of pointing out, lord keynes reminds us that people are entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.

it is most assuredly your opinion and not a fact that suddenly people have a massive fear of entitlement spending: if that were the case, the gop wouldn't have knee-jerked so obviously on "we won't touch medicare ever, not one penny."

as for voting outcomes, what matters is who is motivated to come to the polls: it's a big deal if 40% of voters actually show up for congressional elections in a non-presidential year. motivation and gotv is super important. failure to pass health care access reform leaves democrats with absolutely zero reason to come out and vote, while the crazed right-wing base, perhaps 15% of the total electorate, is absolutely motivated to vote. if you're starting behind 15-0, and only 25% are voting, you need to pick up 80% of the rest of the voters to win elections.

with a still-dismal economy, tiny further stimulus, and a demonstration of a total collapse of nerve by democrats in washington, what are the odds of that? that's what the electoral calculus, not the number of people who would prefer starting over because they think that they can get single-payer through this congress.

er, 25% more are voting....

re: any post by Conrad -

It might, accentuate the "might", help make your arguments more believable if you didn't refer to HCIR as "Obamacare". Sorta gives you away, you know?