So here’s an idea, I have been told reliably, that leaders of both Houses are considering: The House would pass a version of the reconciliation bill containing the various amendments and send it to the Senate. The Senate would change it slightly (in ways that the House agreed to), which would require the House to vote on it again. Only after it got the revised reconciliation bill would the House take up the Senate bill. The House could then pass both bills and send both to the president. Problem solved, health-care passes, and we move on.

Not all the difficulties with this scenario have been worked through, and it is not a slam dunk. For one thing, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi faces a revolt on her left against passing the Senate bill without changes. Some may still have to be persuaded to make sure it gets the votes it needs. There are also some House Democrats from moderate-to-conservative districts who are wary, after Massachusetts, of voting for a health-care bill, period. And there are a lot of procedural issues that need to be ironed out.

Nonetheless, for those (and I’m one of them) who believe in health-care reform -- and who think the Democrats would be committing suicide if they gave up on health care now -- it’s heartening to hear that serious people are making serious efforts to get a health bill through. In a pinch, I think that enacting the Senate bill into law without changes is far preferable to passing nothing. But I also understand that there are aspects of the Senate bill to which House members have legitimate objections. Solving this problem will require Democrats to pull themselves together across many lines of division -- notably between the House and the Senate, and between moderates and liberals. Can they do it? The answer to that question depends in part on leadership from President Obama. Can he do it?