The Economist's visualization of voting relationships in the US Senate

Losing the 60th seat in the Senate might actually end up being the best thing that could have happened to get good healthcare reform done.

They're finally talking about reconciliation:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have begun considering a list of changes to the Senate bill [...] The changes could be included in separate legislation that, if passed, would pave the way for House approval of the Senate bill — a move that would preserve President Barack Obama's vision of a sweeping health reform plan.

With reconciliation, Democrats will have a 9 seat margin of error, rather than the 0 seat margin supermajority strategy. Now that each individual Senator in the Democratic caucus can no longer make demands by threatening to defect, we can finally get a good bill passed.

The Shrill One: "the Senate — and, therefore, the U.S. government as a whole — has become ominously dysfunctional."

Unless some legislator pulls off a last-minute double-cross, health care reform will pass the Senate this week. Count me among those who consider this an awesome achievement. It’s a seriously flawed bill, we’ll spend years if not decades fixing it, but it’s nonetheless a huge step forward.

It was, however, a close-run thing. And the fact that it was such a close thing shows that the Senate — and, therefore, the U.S. government as a whole — has become ominously dysfunctional.