Yet, this essentially affirms the need for the purpose the Obama administration's legislation by proposing healthcare legislation that would have never had a chance of existing if it weren't for Obama in the first place. It's saying
"You were right. People's health is important. We're on a platform that wouldn't be possible without you. That people can tell their children's children they benefitted from. We could do some things so that would allow those same people to tell their grandkids the great things we've (not just Obama) have helped done for their health. But we're going to use this platform to screw over those people. And their children's, children's children can tell them about the time under Obama, when the government actually considered healthcare for the everyman to be something of worthy concern."
This seems... illogical to me, given the motivations involved. Like chasing your own tail. And because there's so much emphasis in trying to get this through to replace something of universal benefit (if I'm more clear something that personally benefited me) rather than taking the time to think of something most beneficial to the citizens of this county, it looks like something that's likely to create a mess down the road (more for ordinary, and especially poor, folk than politicians or for those who wealthy enough to be able to afford not to care).
But oh well. When you are driven by image and power, what makes sense, (or what's good for the people), isn't priority for you. And it kind of shows.
Not really a surprise. It's exactly the kind of thing I expect from the people in charge.