Legal Commentary

Mandates As Bargaining Chip

By Big Tent Democrat

Great post by Kagro:

Imagine if we had a "partner" (or perhaps "co-dependent") in this who's just as eager to see to it that we do get back to "fixing" this system promptly. Someone who, say, stood to profit enormously from it? And suppose the mandates also came with significant budgetary savings attached, as I anticipate will be said to be the case? Well then, we've increased the odds dramatically for getting back to the floor, haven't we?

Those mandates don't do anything for anybody for the next four years. Why do they need to sit idly in the books except as "insurance" to the insurance companies (while we get no such guarantees regarding the "fixes" we need)? Indeed, handing over the mandates now would appear to be pretty good insurance against the need for insurers to agree to allow the Congress to come back and "fix" anything.

Of course this will require actual bargaining skills from Democrats, which we know do not exist. For those interest, my bargaining gambit is a call for sunset provision on mandates.

Speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on December 18, 2009 (boomark / email).