This is a list from The Economist's blog, which analyses item by item the Republican proposals to scale back health-care reform ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/business/04care.html?src=busln ). They conclude that none of this things lower costs or cut the deficit in any meaningful way: Health-reform repeal: Republican priorities on Obamacare | The Economist It goes on to say that Republicans have also talked of eliminating the "the Independent Payment Advisory Board, an expert panel which would have the power to reduce Medicare payments without congressional approval. Eliminating the IPAB would cost $15.5 billion in this decade, according to the CBO, but more importantly, it would scrap the most promising existing mechanism for bending down the cost curve on Medicare." Now in all honesty, there's really not much of a chance for the Republicans to go ahead and totally scrap the bill; the Senate and White House would not allow it. So they have to I suppose propose things that dismantle it to please their constituents. But at the same time none of these measures really do much for anything of the two key issues of cost and deficit. What do you guys think, especially Republicans I guess, is it important (either for real policy reasons or simply political reasons) to go through with these as a matter of principle or should the priority be doing things that actually solve the core problems? Comment away, and feel free to bring your own sources.