According to a couple of dem candidates

One of the things that he demanded in order to support Obamacare was no public option. Because of his duplicitous money-grubbing treachery, our health care system has suffered.

Adding a public option to the ACA is a no-brainer. It would improve the situation for millions of American families.

It's also important to remember that duplicitous snakes like Lieberman do not deserve respect, and his vile duplicity should be a reminder to never allow horse trading like this to create bad policy.

I'm kind of a Medicare for all skeptic, mostly because Medicare is actually horrible. just as a point of logic, it irks me when people start explaining how Medicare will be totally transformed into Medicaid. Which makes me wonder, why not call it Medicaid for all?

Is that a better launching pad for the PO, or just start fresh like the state health coops that seemed to work?

Rationally, I think that private insurance is wasteful and sucks up resources and creates profits off of people's suffering. but I also think that many Americans are very comfortable with their insurance, have a somewhat positive attitude toward their own private insurance policies through their workplace, and I think that the fear of the unknown will make the general population fearful about switching to a national health service or a single payer system.

My favorite model is Canada. The Canadian national health system is administered through the provinces, and so people living in British Columbia deal with British Columbian health services. The control is mostly local, although Ottawa requires certain elements and governs transferability as people move from one province to another. I think that if each state had its own single-payer, people would be more likely to feel some kind of loyalty and trust for that single-payer setup.

When I think about reforming our health care system, I always want to be mindful of the fact that Americans have a wide range of views about this subject. I also think an important data point is the fact that many Americans begrudgingly accept the current situation, this mishmash of private and Medicaid and Medicare coverage. And I think our country is so broken apart that any reform this area could easily be stymied simply because of partisan bickering.

For all.

to try it out. If Public Option is anywhere near as good as we think, within 5 years most people will be enrolled and it will be easy to go to MFA.

Going for MFA in 2020 -- or a candidate that is stuck on MFA -- is a sure way to reelect trump or whatever GOPer runs in his place.

... the public option - where people can buy into existing Medicare at age -9 months and up. Politicians who run on Medicare for All will be able to claim that everyone can have Medicare so thus it is available for everyone.

As a product of the UK's National Health Service, naturally I believe a healthcare system that is available to all and free at the point of delivery is the way to go. IMO employers shouldn't be involved with providing healthcare, it's not usually their core business.

Maybe what America will end up with is Medicare with Opt Outs - where everyone has a base Medicare plan from birth, but people can opt out of Medicare and go with a private plan.

if the SCOTUS says that the entire ACA is unconsitutional.

Also, once there is a public option all the moderates and right wingers who adore private health insurance companies will scream that they have to pay for the poors and they don't wanna.

Not a whole separate program. That was the mistake they made in 2009, IMO - calling it a "public option" and proposing it as a separate program instead of starting out with the Medicare buy-in that they ultimately considered. Medicare already has a working infrastructure and it's popular. The word "public" in some places is perceived, fairly or not, as inferior or only for poor people. I blame this on Republicans who deliberately underfund things like the DMV so people have a negative experience dealing with government bureaucracy.

Medicare would have to be totally reinvented.

If you want the public option to be popular with the people that would buy into it, it’s coverage would have to be expanded from what it is now, and I don’t see how that could be done in an economical way.

Right now Medicare is based on an elderly population so it does not cover birth control, or obstetric care. It doesn’t cover pediatric care, or even routine childhood vaccinations. It also doesn’t cover prescription drugs that most private insurance covers.

In order to include all of those items will greatly increase premiums. Under Medicare for All these things will, presumably, be included, but because it will be an all in program that everyone must be a participant cost won’t be a deciding issue for people.

I am not in favor or M4A, I am just pointing out a flaw in the thinking that a public option won’t have a backlash, or will automatically be super popular.