Reply #67: That is a good article

[creeksneakers2]

I agree with Edwards that dueling public and private health care systems would be a great way to make a transition. It would takes lots of time to work the bugs out of a new system anyway. The public system would have the advantage of efficiencies of economies of scale. The public system would also be subsidized. If the government can actually run health care better than the insurance companies then the public will drift over to the government insurance side. Competition would make both sides better.

I don't see the difference with Hillary's plan though. She has expanded government insurance too. Edwards is more up front about the likelihood that the transition would probably wipe out private insurance companies, while I've never heard Hillary mention that.

A speaking tour from Edwards wouldn't necessarily compel Congress to vote out their own health care. The Edwards hypothetical assumes no response and the public jumping to Edwards' side. Members of Congress might say that they like health care but not Edwards' plan for example. They might all talk like they are for Edwards' plan while quietly killing it before it ever comes up for a vote.

I don't believe that Edwards seriously believes he can pull this off.