James Wallner, a vice president at the Heritage Foundation, argues in favor of the Senate Republican leadership’s preferred strategy on Obamacare, which he describes thus:

Congressional Republicans appear set to finally repeal Obamacare using reconciliation, a process that allows them to overcome a Democratic filibuster in the Senate and pass budget-related legislation with a simple majority of the chamber’s members.
The repeal bill would include a transition period to give Congress time to debate how best to replace Obamacare with a series of patient-centered reforms, each of which would address specific problems in the health care system.

I’d be more enthusiastic about what Senate Republicans are planning to do if that description were accurate. Unfortunately, the “repeal” legislation would be a partial repeal that left Obamacare’s regulations intact. The result could well be greater instability in health-insurance markets: a potential problem Wallner acknowledges and then leaves unaddressed. This seems to me to be a mistake both substantively and politically. But even if it’s not, nobody should call a bill that leaves Obamacare’s regulations in place “repeal.”