Fast or slow? Incremental or comprehensive? Right out of the gate or later? Kids or everyone? Those are just some of the questions President-elect Barack Obama needs to ask and answer about the size, pace, breadth and cost of health reform, which has returned to the national agenda with a prominence unmatched since the early 1990s.

Kristen Gerencher of MarketWatch has a good overview of the possible parameters of reform, written for an audience that pays attention to the economics of reform.

Several of the experts quoted in the piece called for a bipartisan approach—the road not taken in 1993-94. And some of the policy wonks argue that, campaign mantras aside, Obama would be wise to take a look at one aspect of Sen. John McCain's proposal: eliminating or perhaps capping (to protect lower income people) or gradually phasing out the employer tax exclusion. Taxing health benefits may not be popular with some Obama backers, and it may not even be popular with Obama himself, but many experts in health policy across the political spectrum think the idea has merit—on the condition that it be done as part of overall reform that extends meaningful and affordable quality coverage to everyone.

Princeton's Uwe Reinhardt, for instance, said one alternative would be to keep the benefit tax free for people whose income is below $75,000, tax half of it for those between $75,000 and $150,000, but treat it all as income for anyone in higher brackets.

The tax break is worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $200 million, noted New America health policy director Len Nichols. That's more than enough to cover all Americans. "My prediction is we are going to put the tax expenditure measure on the table, worrisome though it is to both business and labor, because the alternatives are not so pretty."