Speaking of looking at the issue more deeply, what think you about Readthebill.org?

The trick is getting 60 votes for any method of increasing revenue. McCain’s support for dumping the employer tax exemption is one reason he got his ass kicked last November, MediCare Advantage wouldn’t exist if lots of Senators didn’t have an ideological attachment to private for-profit insurance, and “encouraging Doctors to try low-cost procedures” has historically been spun into “forcing Doctors to give you inferior medical care.”

To top it off the GOP is in full opposition mode. Obama’s ideas will be bitterly opposed by the minority no matter what. I’d hope McCain would still support ending the Employer tax exemption, but in this political environment that may not happen.

BTW, keep in mind that Obama does have the option of using reconciliation to force his program through. Reconciliation is the best option for the Senate’s GOP leadership, but it’s not great for any of the other players in this game. It’s a very blunt instrument. He could expand MediCare. Arguably that would be good for patients, but it’s 100% clear that doing so would screw insurers (fewer customers) and providers (MediCare doesn’t pay very well).

He probably won’t be able to convince 218 reps and 50 sens to go along with truly universal MediCare, but even Medicare at 55 would greatly reduce the amount hospitals and doctors receive from private insurance.

Which means that as October approaches the health lobby will be a lot more amenable to any deals Obama offers.

Well, even though health care reform is THE key issue to sustained economic prosperity

FIRST, define “health care reform.” If by “health care reform” you mean the types of “reforms” so far proposed in Congress and coming out of the White House, I would challenge you to even attempt to empirically prove that assertion. It’s simply not so. Indeed, I can think of many ways in which the exact opposite is true, where “reform” could destroy economic prosperity.