About six months ago we published this little gem. It outlined what happens after an Obamacare passage? Today no doubt there is talk of repeal. This is good, we think. But, absent that, what was the plan? Lets have a look….

Imagine Christmas Eve goes by without a hitch and the Senate bill makes it to conference. Further imagine that the conference committee can actually get a bill together and that bill gets approved by both Houses of Congress AND Mr. Obama signs it all into law.

We’re done right?

Ha. Think again.Think Again.

This from Senator Tom Harkin;

“This is not the end of health care reform,” Sen. Tom Harkin declared on the Senate floor after midnight this morning. “This is the beginning of health care reform.”

Harkin was attempting to convince restive liberals that even a scaled back health care bill that did not include their beloved public option was still worth passing. But his comments, along with those made by other Senate Democrats in the week leading up to this morning’s 1 a.m. vote to advance the Senate health care bill, confirmed what critics have been saying throughout the health care debate. The point isn’t that this one piece of legislation, on its own, will impose a Canadian-style, government-run health care system on the United States immediately. The point is that Democrats are putting infrastructure in place that will allow them to implement a government-run system over time.

This legislation enables to federal government to get its hands on every aspect of the health care system — and it’s only a matter of time before it tighten its grip. Just listen to what Democrats are saying now:

“What we need to do is lay a strong foundation,” Sen. Ron Wyden said in an interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow last week. “A foundation that we can build on in the years ahead. We are not going to get everything we want in round one, but we are going to get a foundation that we are going to build on in the years ahead.”
Sen. Jay Rockefeller told the New Republic “that liberal advocates could try again another year to push for the reforms that didn’t make it into the current bill.” He said, “You know we’re going to be back next year, and the year after that, and the year after that.”

And in comments on the Senate floor on Friday, Sen. John Kerry argued that Democrats shouldn’t even wait that long. Kerry recalled how Sen. Ted Kennedy regretted he never accepted a deal President Richard Nixon offered that would have forced employers to insure everybody, with some help from government. “The lesson Teddy learned is this,” Kerry explained. “When it comes to historic breakthroughs in America, especially in social policies, you make the best deal that you can, and immediately, you start pushing for ways to improve the deal.”
Kerry said Kennedy applied that lesson after successfully fighting for a minimum wage increase in 1996, only to turn around and immediately call for another increase while at a victory rally. “He was in the victory moment, and he turned to Congresman George Miller, and he said, ‘I’m introducing a bill to raise the minimum wage,” Kerry recounted. “And George Miller said, ‘What do you mean? You haven’t even let the dust settle?’ And (Kennedy) said, ‘We’ve gotta move on this.’
The same logic, Kerry said, should apply to passing health care legislation. And as evidence, he noted that Medicare and Medicaid have greatly expanded over time.

“I know a lot of my progressive friends have been upset that certain things weren’t in it,” Harkin said of the Senate bill on Saturday. “But I put it this way. What we’re building here is not a mansion, it’s a starter home.… It has room for expansions and additions in the future.”
If this health care legislation becomes law, Democrats will attempt to use the new infrastructure they built to add stricter regulations, more subsidies, and additional mandates. They will continue to incrementally expand existing government-run programs such as Medicaid. And as health care spending spirals out of control, instead of faulting government intervention, liberals will blame the absence of a public option.

See here for the full article from the American Spectator.