Obamacare endgame and the fall of Greece

James: This week, Shane and I thought we'd try something different.

Instead of using our columns to talk past each other, his assessment of politics from a conservative perspective and mine from a more liberal one, we'd actually sit down and have a conversation about the week's political news.

We are at downtown Aspen Coffee and it's been a busy week in political news. Everything from Obama's final push for health care reform to the fall of Greece — again.

Let's start with health care, the topic on the minds of many Americans.

The president made some major news this week on the health care front.

Shane: That's right. Health care has returned from the dead. In the last couple of weeks, we've seen a bipartisan health care summit and all this talk of "reconciliation." Hardly a minute passes the 24 hour news cycle someone without mentioning that buzz word.

James: Ah, the "R" word. What's this reconciliation talk?

Shane: Recently, Democrats appear determined to pass sweeping health care legislation even without the usual 60-vote majority in the Senate. So, in comes "reconciliation." Typically used on budgetary issues, it requires a simple up-and-down vote (majority) to pass legislation.

When examining recent history, one discovers that reconciliation is far from the "nuclear option" portrayal that Democrats and Republicans have pushed on certain issues. Democrats cried foul of its use in 2001 for the Bush tax cuts. Now, you'll find Republicans complaining about its use in terms of passing health care legislation.

However, in this case, its use is fairly unique. The previously mentioned Bush tax cuts had bipartisan support in Congress in the form of 12 "Yes" votes from Democratic Senators. The 1995 Welfare Reform Act also used reconciliation, but with significant bipartisan support. At this point, it appears unlikely that a Republican will accept the latest health care bill. Obviously, reconciliation isn't unheard of in the Senate, but its past examples have seen both Republicans and Democrats supporting the legislation. At this point, Team Obama is going it alone.

James: You know what I find interesting here?

Go back and look at the 12 Democratic "Yes" votes, you see some familiar faces, specifically Sen. Mary Landrieu (LA), Sen. Ben Nelson (NE), Max Baucus (MT)

Those names are the names responsible for the mess we're in right now, both in regards to our current economic crisis —better known as the Great Recession — and the health care nonsense in Congress.

Those tax cuts you reference?

If you ask most economists, partisanship aside, they will tell you that reason we have the record deficit problems we have right now are three things:

1) The unfunded Bush Tax cuts in 2001 that the Republicans championed and conservative Democrats— Landrieu, Nelson, and Baucus — went along with to shore up their so-called fiscal conservative bona fides.

2) The entitlement programs in desperate need of overhaul, i.e. Medicare and social security

3) The two wars we're mired in at present in Iraq and Afghanistan that we were so patriotic to fight but not to fund.

Then, the spending the Obama administration has done since coming to office, a drop in the bucket in comparison to the first three.

So, that's an example of the right using reconciliation.

Here, we have a health care bill that not a single Republican is interested in passing for political reasons despite poll after poll showing support for the specifics of the bill

And, those conservative Democrats? They're the ones asking for special deals, the ones conservatives on Fox News are so pissed about.

So, let's get real here.

Shane: I'm not sure if you can call $3.6 trillion a drop in the bucket. That is Obama's 2010 budget, after all.

James: In comparison to the wars we're still funding, etc., a drop in the bucket but, point taken.

Shane: I think most everyone agrees that the health care system in this country needs some degree of reform. However, I contest that the American people want this specific piece of legislation. As of today, the RealClearPolitics.com average comes out to be 51 percent in opposition, with only 40 percent supporting it.

James: Again, point conceded.

Most Americans do oppose this bill but, when these same polls ask if voters favor the specifics of the bill —i.e. the creation of insurance exchanges where folk could compare plans, preventing insurance companies from denying people on the basis of preexisting conditions, allowing young Americans to remain on their parents insurance plans until age 26, even the creation of a so-called public option to help compete against the insurance companies, the results reverse dramatically. You have to pass those specifics together if the bill is to prove effective.

Voters — Republican, Independent and Democrat — are pissed that some Democratic Senators got sweetheart deals, that a single-payer system was never even up for debate, and they're concerned, rightfully so, about costs during a recession.

But, the current system is madness and unsustainable, like you noted.

At least Obama's recent proposal removes those sweetheart deals and offers a foundation to build on, at least that's my hope as a progressive.

That said, what's the likelihood Obama gets a bill on his desk to sign?

Shane: Using the reconciliation process, I think there's a very high probability that Obama will see health care legislation on his desk. Despite widespread opposition and virtually no bipartisan support, Obama will then proudly proclaim "Mission Accomplished." Never mind that the bill will cost Americans for years before they see any sort of supposed benefit.