Public Option should BE the Compromise Position

It seems to me that if some prominent Congressional leaders were to take a strong public stand in favor of a single-payer system via speeches, town halls, the talk show circuit. etc., opposition to a plan with a mere public option - which would still allow for some measure of profit for the bloodsucking insurance industry - would soften considerably.

Right now the only alternatives being presented in the public forum are the public option and business as usual, so of course the industry is going to pull out all the stops to defeat the public option.

I could have seen Ted Kennedy doing this, or maybe Hillary if she was still in the Senate, but it seems that no one of our current "leaders" is willing to step up to the plate.

He is willing to take a stand

but he is a fairly obscure Congressman that not a lot of people had heard of until now. Where is the "leadership" on this issue?

In order to be just barely acceptable, it needs to be a "robust" public option, and by "robust" I mean a plan that is projected to cover 50+ million Americans within five years.

:dem:

-Laelth

A robust public option would be a step in the right direction, and it would have to be implemented fairly quickly, so that the effects would be readily noticible.

I think we could get that if it was made very clear to the Repugs and the insurance industry that the threat of a single-payer system was hanging over their heads.

Remember, as some one just pointed out on this board today, even Canada did not go single-payer all at once.