[Professor S]

I think both sides didn't want to work with one another, but for a very legitimate reason. As was shown in the health care summit, both of these parties are coming to this issue from different planets.

The Democrats want to have centralized control of the health care system to mandate coverage and cost.

The Republicans mainly want to open competition, increase choices and limit legal damages to allow market forces to create a consumer friendly private marketplace to lower costs and increase coverage.

The philosophy is so divergent there really is nothing to compromise about, as pretty much any acceptable compromise by either side completely destroys their point of view.

If I had to "blame" one side over the other, it would be the dems because:

1) They had the supermajority and I believe that puts the responsibility of inclusion on them as they could have just as easily completely ignored their opponents (and they would have IMO if not for the public outcry against the plan)

2) Republicans were never invited to help create the bill, only to either vote on it or add limited amendments.

3) The Republicans actually got bipartisan support for their opposition to the bill. Not one Republican was in favor of what passed.

4) Instead of trying to create a more moderate bill once they lost the supermajority, the Dems decided to use a budgetary process tactic to avoid a filibuster, and then used another process measure to "deem and pass" once it passed the house so they could avoid any further debate on the subject. This does not seem like the actions of a party that much cares about working with the other party.