The first question that I have for Paul Krugman is not whether there are benefits in the current bill, because there are, but whether there are enough. A mandate is very, very valuable to the insurance industry. What actually did they "give" for our get? Nothing, right? In fact, they gain mandated enrollees and pricing/bargaining power.
The second question is about get-what-you-can-now-and-fix-it-later. I think that people are going to end up resenting the mandate. This means that there is a unique cost to delaying 'the ideal' solution. It will show up in political terms, down the road...especially when premiums rise.
And Senator Kerry is so screwed-up, that he doesn't realize that Howard Dean is trying to do pushback on those who would put themselves in the "center" of this debate, like Leiberman. I mean, do you think Lieberman wants to be painted as against choice, because the voters want choice in their healthcare plans and providers...