Reply #33: Everyone i know working for a public option actually would prefer single payer.

[John Q. Citizen]

In fact, the proponents have said repeatedly it is a stepping stone to single payer.

So why not just pass a single payer system? Since that's what both the public option people want and the single payer people want?

Any public option plan that functions like you or I would want it to function is unacceptable to the health care industrial complex. And just as unacceptable as a single payer system.

So there is zero political advantage to a public option over a single payer system. In fact it would be harder to pass since a lot of people who favor single payer don't want a public option system

Then their is the question of cost. We already have tons of evidence that single payer contains costs quite effectively while insuring quality care for all with complete choice of care provider. It's portable, it's easy, both for the care provider and for the patient.

The public option will raise costs significantly. It will require widespread and constant means testing to determine who is eligible for government subsidies and who isn't and how much subsidies someone is eligible for.

For example, the cost of administering Medicade is about 5% higher than the cost of administering Medicare, since virtually everyone is eligible for Medicare when they turn 65. There is no means testing, so it's much cheaper to do. With Medicade, the applicant has to go down to the county and fill out reams of paper work documenting their income, and if the income changes they have to update that in a timely fashion. And a case worker has to review and document the incomes and then has to determine what benefit the recipient gets. It's expensive, it's time consuming, if a mistake is made the recipient has to pay back any over benefits accidentally dispersed. The state has to follow up and collect.

Also, remember what happened as soon as the Medicare part D (drug benefit) went into effect and the government subsidized big pharma? Drug prices took a big jump. And why not? Free money for big pharma. The same will happen with private insurance.

Cost is why we are where we are today. If health care weren't too expensive no one would be debating anything.

But cost is why so many people are uninsured and under insured.

It's why there are less people covered by private insurance today than a year ago, and why a year ago there were less people covered by private insurance than a year before that.

The public option is actually a bail out for private insurance companies.

Why not demand what we want and what we know works to cover everyone and to bring down costs? Anything else is just screwing around.