ObamaCare vote

When the new House GOP majority voted in January to repeal ObamaCare, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowed he wouldn't even take up the measure in his chamber, scorning Republicans for wasting time on "symbolic votes."

But as part of the last-minute budget deal struck a week ago to avert a threatened government shutdown, it appears Sen. Reid has agreed to hold just such a vote.

As part of the deal that funds the government through the end of September and cuts $38.5 billion from current spending levels -- in fact, the "cuts" include unspent census money, leftover federal construction funding and $2.5 billion from the most recent renewal of highway programs that can't be spent because of restrictions set by other legislation -- Sen. Reid agreed to a debate and vote in the Senate on legislation that would repeal ObamaCare.

The deal also requires several studies that will force the Obama administration to disclose the full impact of the law's mandates, including a study on the cost of premiums; an audit of all the waivers given to businesses and unions that can't meet the new annual coverage limits; and a report on all of the contractors hired to implement the law and the cost of those contracts.

The repeal itself is expected to fail in the Democrat-controlled Senate -- and to be vetoed by President Obama on the off chance it succeeds.

But that's not the point.

Except in safely leftist districts, Democrats ran away from the expensive major advance toward "single-payer" socialized medicine in last fall's elections. Democratic senators -- especially those facing tough re-election battles in conservative states -- would surely prefer not to have a recent vote on their records, supporting the unpopular federal takeover of one-sixth of the nation's economy.

But Sen. Reid will have to get his entire caucus -- now reduced from 59 to 53 -- to back ObamaCare and its plan to have the IRS act as "health insurance cops," in any new vote. It's "only symbolic," yes. But is it a symbol Democrats are now anxious to offer their constituents?