Two weeks ago, Democrat Barney Frank predicted that if Scott Brown wins, “it’ll kill the health bill.” Brown was elected to serve the remainder of Ted Kennedy’s senate term after campaigning to be the 41st vote that Republicans need to block the Democrats’ health care bill.

Politics in Massachusetts is defined by independents. And polls shows they have overwhelmingly turned against Obama’s agenda, which includes cap-and-trade and health care reform. Last week, Obama attempted to justify the loss by saying he was “ so busy just getting stuff done and dealing with the immediate crises that were in front of us that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people. . . .” So apparently Obama was just too busy “getting stuff done” to communicate with the people. Never mind that he traveled to Boston to campaign for Brown’s opponent (as did Bill Clinton).

Brown’s surprising victory has effectively stopped health care reform in its tracks. His election strips Democrats of their 60-seat supermajority needed to overcome a Senate filibuster. Since the House and Senate had passed very different reform bills, Democrats were trying to develop a consensus before Brown altered the political landscape.

Other pieces of massive legislation like Social Security and civil rights have enjoyed meaningful bipartisan support, which is advisable when Congress acts to change the country’s course. Despite Obama’s pledge to bridge the partisan gap in Washington, he was attempting to ram through health care reform with Republicans in lock-step against it.

House leaders admitted last week that they lacked the votes to pass the Senate’s version of the bill. If the House had passed the Senate’s version, Obama could have signed the measure into law without any further action from the Senate.

Instead of proceeding in a bipartisan fashion, Democratic leaders have telegraphed their intention to try to muscle their way past GOP objections despite worries about next November’s elections. Some House Democrats are trying to approve the Senate bill along with a guarantee that the Senate would make several changes with a tactic called “budget reconciliation.” It requires only a simple-majority vote for budget-related matters. Orrin Hatch said over the weekend that if Democrats attempt this ploy, “it will be all out war.”

Democrats want to bar health insurers from refusing coverage to people already suffering medical problems. But without requiring most people to buy coverage, millions might wait until they have a serious problem before buying a policy, thereby driving up the costs. But “individual mandates” to buy insurance would require subsidies for those with low-incomes, which would require a tax increase.