Congress will soon begin floor debate on the various health care bills that have made their way through House and Senate committees. Get ready for more posturing than a Milan fashion show.

The artful arguments pro and con will be crafted for the cameras, with home-state audiences uppermost in the minds of senators and representatives.

The actual content of the final legislation that goes to a vote will be the result not so much of this debate but the deals struck in closed-door meetings between administration and congressional aides. Those meetings have been underway for some time, of course.

What's said in public is intended to inspire, outrage or confuse the public to try to gain leverage in the backroom dealings along with advancing re-election prospects for those in a dicey political position in next year's election.

Ultimately this momentous legislation will rise or fall as a matter of power politics. Democrats will vote for it and Republicans will vote against it - no matter what's in the final bill. The thing to keep in mind is that Democrats have been trying for 50 years to get a national health care plan. Another thing to keep in mind is that the rest of the developed world has public health care, of varying quality to be sure. The United States doesn't, a great embarrassment to Democrats. But now the United States has a Democratic president, a Democratic Senate and a Democratic House. The Democratic Party just might have the votes to pass a health plan. The Republicans just might not have the votes to block it. But it's real close, hence all the private dealing and public posturing.

There are questions about the Democratic majorities in both the Senate and House. In the Senate, Democrats have on paper the 60 votes to not only pass a health plan but block a filibuster by Republicans. That number of 60 includes two independents who are liberal and might as well be Democrats.

The administration is hoping against hope it can also persuade one Republican to vote for the legislation. That moderate is Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. President Obama has met with her numerous times, and it probably hasn't been to discuss her state's potato crop.

Snowe's support is particularly valuable because it would allow some key Democrat to vote against the health bill in order to mollify conservative home-state voters and win a tough re-election fight in 2010.

Whether Obama and Democratic Party leaders can in fact produce 60 votes in the Senate to prevent a Republican filibuster is unclear, but there is a fallback position. That is to use a parliamentary maneuver to take a filibuster off the table and effectively allow passage with a simple majority vote of 51 senators. That prospect gets raised from time to time, which is all part of the political game.

In the House, meanwhile, the Democrats have a sizable majority of 256 to 177, but a number of those Democrats come from conservative states and some of them face serious election challenges. The home-state political climate matters a great deal to them, as does whatever cover and incentives the president can provide.

A national health plan is due for a vote before the end of the year. There'll be no such opportunity next year with the 2010 elections on Washington's mind.

The party in power nearly always loses seats in the mid-term election and next year is expected to be no exception. It's do-or-die time for Obama and the Democrats. Either they get a bill through now or there probably won't be another opportunity for years.

NED BRISTOL is a member of The Sun Chronicle Editorial Board and a former editor of the newspaper.