Man Dates

Uh oh, this doesn't sound too promising for the future of universal health care in this country.

The bill, which would offer coverage to millions of uninsured Californians, passed the State Assembly in December but began to stall in the Senate last week after the state’s legislative analyst raised questions about its financing and two prominent Democrats announced they would vote against it.

Chief among many Democrats’ concerns was the proposal of a so-called individual mandate, a stipulation requiring every Californian to pay for and maintain a minimum level of health insurance, though some residents would be exempt because of low income or financial hardship. A new board would negotiate rates with insurance companies, while employers would be required to spend a minimum amount on health care, though contributions would be capped.

But for some, the numbers did not add up.

“I just came to the conclusion that the working people are going to end up paying for it,” said Senator Leland Yee, Democrat of San Francisco, who announced his opposition before a committee meeting last Wednesday. “There’s control for everybody else — the employers are protected and the insurance industry. The only group that’s vulnerable is the working people.”

Asked to surmise its odds of passage on Monday, Mr. Yee was blunt. “I wouldn’t bet 5 cents on it,” he said.

Mandates -- you know, those things Krugman repeatedly takes Obama to task for omitting from his plan -- seem to be the rocks against which the Cali governor's bill is crashing. Maybe Obama senses something Krugman doesn't; that, politically, mandates are distrusted by both sides of the debate. Whether "universal" health care can be achieved without them is the 1.2 billion dollar question.