Shell games in the Senate for ObamaCare describes how a separate bill will undo major cost reductions in the Baucus bill, even though the two bills weren’t considered together by the Congressional Budget Office when it evaluated implications for the deficit.

Why Democrats’ Health Care Overhaul May Die points out that universal coverage is so expensive that it can’t happen without unpopular new taxes.

Critical Condition, from the National Review Online says:

The problem with Obamacare is not insufficient governmental force; the problem is that the Democrats are pursuing the wrong goal. They are desperate to enact something they can call “universal coverage” without any coherent plan to slow the pace of rising costs. In that context, a new entitlement for subsidized insurance is exceedingly expensive, which is why the sponsors try to hide some of the costs behind mandates, hidden taxes, compulsion, and insurance regulation. However, as they are now finding out, there’s no free lunch here. Someone has to pay for it all. It’s just a question of who and how much.

Both We’re Going to Let You Die, in the Wall Street Journal, and The Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes, in Pajamas Media discuss Robert Reich’s 2007 speech to UC Berkeley students explaining why politicians have trouble telling the truth about health care reform – you can’t have something for nothing.

A follow up question to that conclusion: is what we are getting better than what we have now?