Wyden vs. Baucus

Hat tip to Ezra Klein on this recently released Lewin Group working paper, which reviews the Baucus and Wyden proposals, identifies the similarities and differences, and presents ideas on how the differences could be resolved.

What I'm interested in are the similarities:

• Both bills require all Americans to have coverage;
• They both provide subsidies for the purchase of insurance for people living below 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL);
• Both bills would create a national network of exchanges to provide access to a range of affordable health plans;
• The bills would require employers to contribute to the cost of covering their workers;
• Employers would be able to continue providing health insurance;
• Both bills prohibit insurers from declining coverage due to health status;
• Both extend Medicaid benefits to 100 percent of the FPL; and
• Both have some form of a public plan option.

Will it be these items, and these items alone, on which a consensus is finally built?