Because so many here love Krugman and Dean in equal parts, it is only just that we look at what both leaders of the left have to say on the current Senate health care bill.
Krugman explains the political situation best. People are disappointed, Obama should have been stronger on the economic policies, and he isn't bring as much change as people thought.
BUT HE STILL SUPPORTS THE SENATE BILL! (As does John Podesta now, noted below)
Why? Krugman calls the reform "a big step toward greater security for Americans and greater social justice; it would also save many lives over the decade ahead."
Read the entire post please, as he links to others about why the individual mandate does do some good (I will admit that insurance companies profit from it as well).
His conclusion is the most important, and I think is directed at most Kos readers:
So there’s a lot of bitterness out there. But please, keep your priorities straight.
By all means denounce Obama for his failed bipartisan gestures. By all means criticize the administration. But don’t take it out on the tens of millions of Americans who will have health insurance if this bill passes, but will be out of luck — and, in some cases, dead — if it doesn’t.
I agree with Krugman. I think people are disappointed, it will show in the 2010 polls, and Obama will have to decide in the future what direction he wants to go. But at the same time I think overall this bill is better than nothing.
Forcing an individual mandate seem unfair because there is little competition, but it also brings everyone into the system. That is a step.
Thoughts?
I am glad that we have academic reasons on both sides of this though. Progressives think about issues, debate, and don't always agree. That says a lot about the current health of the movement. We're not based on a puff of air.
Update: Over at Think Progress, it also looks like John Podesta has weighed in, arguing the "Progressive Case" for the bill.