Jonathan Cohn (What, You Have A Better Idea For Cost Control?):
David Brooks thinks it. David Gregory thinks it. The Washington Post editorial page thinks it. And, what the heck, I think it. If health care reform passes Congress, the final legislation probably won't cut the cost of medical care as quickly as seems possible on paper. But would the legislation make a good start--as good a start as possible, given political reality? Brooks, Gregory, the Post, and plenty of other critics seem to think the answer is "no." I think they are nuts...
Let's be very clear about what is going on. There is another branch of the multiverse right now--another component of the universe's quantum wave function that has decohered and is no longer interfering with our branch--in which Mitt Romney is president. And in that branch, this health care bill--minus its Medicare cuts--passed the Senate 80-20 (with the 20 being liberal Democrats whining about how it wasn't a big enough reform to work) last year. And that bill passed with the enthusiastic approbation of alternate-world David Brooks, alternate-world Gregory, and the alternate-world Washington Post editorial page. For our health care reform bill is, in its essentials, Mitt Romney's plan for Massachusetts.
Brooks, Gregory, the Post, and company are opposed to the health care bill not because they think it will not cut costs, but because it was proposed by a Democrat.