As the debate over health reform has unfolded, we’ve been presented with a straightforward narrative: while the White House has sought to solve the nation’s most pressing problems, the congressional minority, allied with Fox News, the insurance industry, and a loose coalition of political extremists, have united to oppose a number of commonsense measures, the most important of which is comprehensive health reform legislation. The Senate bill, we’ve been told, is “substantively bipartisan,” i.e., it includes all or virtually all reasonable measures proposed by Republican legislators. And so the opponents of the reform legislation are, with a few exceptions, offering arguments that are based on falsehoods, highly tendentious, and motivated primarily by political self-interest.

But as we’ve learned, there are a number of vexing problems with the proposed reform that have been largely overlooked, ranging from adverse selection problems stemming from a weak mandate, the administrative challenges posed by the new health subsidies, and much else besides. You don’t have to be under the illusion that all congressional Republicans fully understand the flaws in the legislation to share at least some of their concerns. And given the history of past entitlement programs, the belief that we will be able to fix serious structural problems with little difficulty seems a tad optimistic. It’s worth stressing that pointing out these flaws is a way to enrich our debate. One could still conclude that we should pass the legislation, only with a better sense of the difficulties we’re likely to face down the road.

The trouble is that the debate so far really has been incredibly black-and-white: if we don’t pass the Senate bill, America is incapable of solving problems and our constitutional democracy is broken. If we do, all hell will break loose. Actually, passing the Senate bill will most likely entrench the status quo, albeit with future taxpayers footing more of the bill for inefficient FFS providers that have been spared rigorous delivery-system reform.

Because these issues are very complex, we look to organizations like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities to clarify and interpret them. This week, I’ve started working with an organization called e21 that intends to shed some light on the economic policymaking process, with a special focus on highlighting and explaining some of the most difficult-to-understand issues. I hope you’ll take a look.