If ACA is struck down, are you really so naive as to think single-payer will come to the rescue?

[eomer]

53. Maybe you'll believe Ezra Klein, then, when he says it didn't?

Excerpt from an Ezra Klein blog entry:

Sen. Michael Bennet's effort to revive the public option in the reconciliation process is gaining steam, with almost 20 senators signing on to the idea. Among them are Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer, who are not, shall we say, possessed of a whimsical or quixotic temperament.

Of course, you don't need almost 20 senators. You need 51, or more. And complicating that project is that the question here is not simply "public option: yes or no?" It's whether you want to jam a public option into a bill that Senate Democrats already passed without a public option. Not only are you throwing out any hope of appearing even slightly bipartisan, but you're also increasing internal dissension and adding unpredictability into a process that's collapsed into chaos already.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/is_the_public_option_making_a.html

Klein is still off by 1 - you don't need 51 but rather 50 because the Vice President can cast the 51st vote. But he's got the general idea. A reconciliation process bill cannot be filibustered so it takes only 50 votes.

If you're still doubtful, here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia article for the final reconciliation bill, showing that it did not need 60 votes (it passed by a vote of 56-43 in the Senate):

In the Senate, the bill faced numerous amendments made by the Republicans, all of which failed. However, the Republicans had two provisions dealing with Pell Grants stricken from the bill due to violations of budget reconciliation rules, forcing the bill to return to the House.[12] The two provisions were: The fourth paragraph of Sec. 2101(a)(2)(C) and Sec. 2101(a)(2)(D).[13][14] On March 25, the bill passed the Senate by a 56–43 vote, with all Republicans and 3 Democrats voting against it.[15] The only Democratic Senators to vote against were: Lincoln (D-AR), Nelson (D-NE) & Pryor (D-AR). Later in the same day the House passed the modified bill by a 220–207 vote, sending it to President Obama for a signature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Care_and_Education_Reconciliation_Act_of_2010

And here is an article by The Hill, stating that reconciliation could be used to pass healthcare reform and that it therefore does not take 60 votes:

The Senate could still use budget rules to pass healthcare without 60 votes, the White House indicated Monday.

President Barack Obama is hopeful that the Senate will pass a healthcare bill with 60 votes, but White House press secretary Robert Gibbs held out the possibility that budget reconciliation rules could still be used.

He said Senate leaders and the White House would turn to those rules, which would prevent the Senate from needing to secure 60 votes for procedural steps, only if they are not making progress.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/67011-white-house-wont-rule-out-reconciliation-rules-on-healthcare