Not to just be all Jon Cohn, all the time here, but his article on Barack Obama's health care plan says it would be change for the better, but criticizes Obama for being too timid:

By contrast, jumping in the deep end involves a little more risk: You might feel really cold for a few seconds. But you'll probably get comfortable pretty quickly. And, once you've made the decision to jump, you're guaranteed to be in the water. You can't get un-wet.

When it comes to achieving universal health care, Obama wants to wade into it: He doesn't want to move everybody into universal coverage until the arrangements are all in place and people feel totally comfortable with it. Yes, he's promising to cover everybody. But the promise is only as good as his word, sincere though it may be.

Those who prefer mandates--a category that, again, happens to include rival John Edwards--prefer to jump in the deep end. They want to seize this opportunity and get the mandate on the books from day one (even if, as practical matter, it's phased in so it becomes fully effective only after a few years). In so doing, they are offering what is, in effect, a stronger guarantee.

The trouble, of course, is that fundamental health care reform isn't a swimming pool. Not only that, but we don't have an especially clear thermometer to assure us that the water's safe. We do have a historical record indicating that everyone who's ever jumped in the pool has wound up on life support. Under the circumstances, I think people who believe that jumping is likely to produce good results have a lot of convincing to do.

My argument for caution, meanwhile, would just be based on the experience of 1993-94. There you had unified Democratic control of the House, Senate, and White House. A plan was introduced. The plan was overwhelmingly popular.

Many Republicans, under the circumstances, were naturally inclined to seek a compromise with the administration. They were, however, persuaded to take a huge risk and rigidly oppose the plan. The risk paid off massively. Opposing the overwhelmingly popular Clinton health care plan didn't damage GOP popularity at all. Instead, it helped produce a GOP landslide win in 1994.

Unless the Democrats have 60 Senate seats in 2009, I think it's overwhelmingly likely that this is going to happen again.

Jump to comments
Presented by

Matthew Yglesias is a former writer and editor at The Atlantic.

Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

Why Are Americans So Bad at Saving Money?

The US is particularly miserable at putting aside money for the future. Should we blame our paychecks or our psychology?

Elsewhere on the web

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus


The Death of Film

You'll never hear the whirring sound of a projector again.


How to Hunt With Poison Darts

A Borneo hunter explains one of his tribe's oldest customs: the art of the blowpipe


A Delightful, Pixar-Inspired Cartoon

An action figure and his reluctant sidekick trek across a kitchen in search of treasure.


I Am an Undocumented Immigrant

"I look like a typical young American."


Why Did I Study Physics?

Using hand-drawn cartoons to explain an academic passion



More in Politics

Just In