Candidates are creating their OWN plans.

Here's what "changed." The plan now includes the wording: Unions will still be able to negotiate for and provide wrap-around services and other coverage not duplicative of the benefits established under Medicare-for-all.

That is no different than what the original plan would have allowed. Certain other candidates have been scaring union members into believing they would lose their health benefits under M4A, which is ridiculous and utterly false.

A least according to the article about it on foxbusinessnews.

My husband's an FDNY 9/11 survivor.

Even before the programs limited to for 9/11 survivors, firefighters always needed specialized health insurance given the generalized effects of the work on overall health of organs like the heart and lungs.

My husband was a union delegate for 25+ years. Health care was a negotiated benefit. The union gave up raises to get better care or accepted lower raises to keep the level of care they already had.

contracts in the U.S., when Bernie said he does know it, "I wrote the damn bill" during a debate?

I guess now anyone with a plan including insurance isn't a centrist-beholden-to-insurance-companies-corporate-shill anymore. Good!

"Unions will still be able to negotiate for and provide wrap-around services and other coverage not duplicative of the benefits established under Medicare-for-all."

That's it. That's not any different from what the original plan would have allowed. I'm willing to bet the only reason they put that wording into the plan is because certain other candidates have been scaring union members into believing they would lose their benefits, which of course they won't. Holy smokes this is a non-story.

see post #14.

Looks like the consensus is that it's best for any plan that gets passed IS going to avoid outlawing private insurance.