Repeal and Replace

It took 24 hours, but Republican party leaders have acknowledged the fantasy of "repealing" Obama's health bill. Their new slogan is, "repeal and replace." But, replace with what?

It took 24 hours, but Republican party leaders have acknowledged the fantasy of "repeal." New slogan is, "repeal and replace." A big improvement. But it raises the question: Replace with what?

During the debate over Obamacare, Republicans could challenge the president's actions by pointing to their costs and burdens. They could invoke conservative principle and broad policy goals: tort reform, sale of insurance across state lines, health savings accounts.

But now we're moved into a phase where "replacement" demands more detail. What specifically would you remove? What to put in its place? "Replacement" implies developing a coherent Republican product with a price tag attached.

That would be a welcome development, but please note: the two Republicans who have produced such a coherent plan, Mitt Romney and Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah, have both come under intense attack from the party's activist base. Bennett faces a very serious primary challenge; Romney has run away from his own handiwork. Who wants to share their fate?

So the question should be pressed as Republicans speak of "replacement" : who is in charge of the process of drafting this replacement? What's the deadline for completion? My guess is that there won't be answers to those questions, that "replacement" will remain a more or less empty slogan through the 2010 elections.