In defense of Reps. Harris and Grimm
But this is actually a pretty easy issue to understand. What Reps. Harris and Grimm want is employer-provided health insurance. It just happens that their employer is a government entity. Employer-provided health insurance is the status quo that health care reform opponents want to preserve. I've yet to hear Tea Partiers proposing that postal workers and park rangers and police officers should be banned from getting health benefits because they work for the government.
What Reps. Harris and Grimm are objecting to when they object to government health insurance is the idea that the government should provide health insurance to everyone just by virtue of being a citizen of the US. If Harris or Grimm loses his seat at a future election and then starts insisting he should still get government-provided health insurance, we can nail him for hypocrisy. But as long as they're working for an employer that offers health insurance as a part of the standard pay and benefits package, there's no contradiction in wanting to take advantage of that just because the employer in question is the government.
(Note that while I'm defending Harris and Grimm against the charge of hypocrisy, that doesn't mean I agree with their principles about who should get health insurance.)