Reply #6: I agree with you bertman

[Time for change]

Actually, it was defined much more clearly by all three of the top Democratic candidates in the run up to the 2008 election, than it is now. There are three basic principles on which they all agreed (in addition to lots of details that were provided):
1. It should be availabe to anyone who wants it.
2. It should provide decent health care at an affordable price.
3. It should help to control costs.

Any plan that doesn't meet those basic principles will be a disaster, and should be voted down.

I talk more about the issue in this post:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5843933

Unfortunately IMO, Obama has become much less specific about his plan since he transformed from candidate to President. I am very disappointed in that. Not only are many of the additional details now missing, but it is unclear whether he intends to keep to the basic principles or even include a public option at all.

Certainly the question of what constitutes "decent health care" is a question that can be debated. I believe that it should pay for abortions, for example, but it seems very possible, or even likely, that it won't, in order to placate the right.

I should also note that, once it is agreed that the public option will meet the basic principles specified above, the remaining questions about its details are similar to the questions that would apply to a single payer plan. Just as a public option plan might not cover abortions (or many other specific procedures), the same thing could apply to a single payer plan.