I don't know if you have ever been in negotiations on anything (I had for a number of years as a local President), but the assumptions of something "being taken off the table" or being "negotiated away" is often something that may have happened (even strategically) at a certain moment in time (snapshot) and then these things may come back again.
The key is not just having "stakeholders" but having knowledgeable ones. I.e., the constant speculation about what is going on in a negotiation by those not directly involved or aware of regs, etc. or even those who come in with an "all or nothing" frame of mind, can be, and has often proven to be, counter-productive.
In the case of PPACA, the media obfuscated the process by focussing on various iterations of what they termed "the bill" (as if it were what was "final"
- but the version initially being discussed was merely one from a single chamber of congress.... And they completely ignored the fact that the same sort of sausage-making had to happen within the other chamber of congress, and then finally the 2 bills had to be reconcilled, leading to more sausage-making. So all that summer, there was a media fiasco about a "healthcare bill" that was in reality, not going to be anything close to final until it passed through various other processes. The same seems to be happening here where what gets reported is as if this is "final" (and then next week it may change and the hysteria returns to the next "final" version of a settlement, and so on).
Negotiation is an art and not a hard-line "my way or the highway" if you want to move towards a goal. The histrionics surrounding these types of agreements aren't helpful.
May not be able to reply back after this right away as I need to head out... 
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read