Dean: single-payer is pretty tough to differentiate from the public option.

[lindisfarne]

Dean also said that single-payer is pretty tough to differentiate from the public option. "Public option is like single payer. It gives consumers the choice. There's no such thing as a pure single-payer plan anywhere." Dean went on to say that there's absolutely no reason for a wedge between single payer advocates and those who support the public option. In fact, Dean said he believes that it's a recipe for disaster. "It's a mistake to drive that wedge. It's how reform has been killed in the past.", Dean said.

http://www.blueoregon.com/2009/06/dean-wyden-the-public-option-single-payer-and-the-rest-of-the-kitchen-sink.html

[slipslidingaway]

1. n/t

[PassingFair]

2. Republicans call it a "stalking horse" for National Health Care...

...like that's a BAD THING!

I like to think of it as the
thin end of the wedge.

I'll take the plan that our
legislators have, please!

[lindisfarne]

3. Dean:Even in Britain, where medicine really is socialized ..15% of health care $s go to private insu

Dr. Dean: President Obama's plan is realistic. Even in Britain, where medicine really is socialized 15% of health care dollars go to private insurance. Private insurance isn't going away. Americans should be the ones to choose. If they like their current, private insurance, they can keep it. If they aren't satisfied, they should be able to choose a public plan. Respect Americans' ability to decide.
http://www.yesmagazine.org/svgblog/2009/06/howard-dean-on-single-payer-health-care.html

[slipslidingaway]

4. Yes there are private plans, but everyone still has basic

coverage from the national health system and has to pay into the system.

They do not have a choice of public or private...the public plan is mandatory to cover all citizens.

Those who have extra money can also purchase private plans for private hospitals etc.

[lindisfarne]

5. I knew that - but I don't really understand your point.

(I'm pretty sure Dean was aware of that when he made the statement as well. He is pretty well informed.)
Guaranteed coverage in the US is possible with the public option - I've said this in another thread. People who can afford it, pay the established rate for the public option. People who cannot either get a sliding fee scale or full subsidy. If you fail to pay it voluntarily, you're assessed the fee for it on your taxes. Your wages are garnished if you fail to pay your taxes. (If you're unemployed, you get a subsidy).

[slipslidingaway]

6. My point is that everyone in the UK pays into the public option

and everyone is covered under the national plan.

If people want to purchase private plans that is in addition to the money they contribute to the public option.

That is not what is being proposed by Obama and Dean.

Also in the UK you do not get a subsidy from the government to purchase a private insurance policy, but people will be allowed to do that in the US.

:shrug:

[lindisfarne]

7. Those are interesting details.But I haven't seen serious proposals to make the US identical to Great

Britain's plans. Dean wasn't making that point, either.

Reread Dean's point. I'm sure you won't agree but that doesn't change his statement.

Americans prefer the public option (67% favor), keeping private insurance for some alongside a public program, over a single payer plan (49% favor). Survey results are from April 2009.

http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/7892.pdf

g. Having a national health plan in which all Americans would get their insurance from a single government plan
49% favor
47% oppose

h. Creating a public health insurance option similar to Medicare to compete with private health insurance plans
Favor: 67%
Oppose: 29%

Just for the record: a single payer plan does not necessarily guarantee the participation of everyone. It depends on how it is set up - is everyone automatically covered, or do people opt in - and do people pay premium directly (and have wages garnished if they don't), or is the cost covered indirectly through taxes?

[slipslidingaway]

8. I know that Dean is not proposing a UK style system, what he did

do is compare the two systems...the UK has private plans and Obama wants private plans.

That can be confusing to people who are not familiar with the UK system.

"Dr. Dean: President Obama's plan is realistic. Even in Britain, where medicine really is socialized 15% of health care dollars go to private insurance. Private insurance isn't going away. Americans should be the ones to choose. If they like their current, private insurance, they can keep it. If they aren't satisfied, they should be able to choose a public plan. Respect Americans' ability to decide."


Amazing that 49% want a single government run health insurance plan without it even being pushed by any prominent Democrats!

[slipslidingaway]

9. 49% favor a single government plan according to this poll...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8474619&mesg_id=8474619

[lindisfarne]

10. Yes, that's the poll I mention in #7. 67% prefer public option. (The poll is from April.) n/t

[slipslidingaway]

11. Just imagine if we had someone fighting for SPHC who had

frequent spots on TV!

Preliminary costs for the public option, we need to check the price tags.

Health Insurance - CBO score: everyone covered, except 37 million remain uninsured

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5864823&mesg_id=5864823

"Effects on Insurance Coverage.

According to the preliminary analysis, once the proposal was fully implemented, the number of people who are uninsured would decline to about 36 million or 37 million, representing about 13 percent of the nonelderly population.

Budgetary Impact of Insurance Coverage Provisions.

On a preliminary basis, CBO and the JCT staff estimate that the major provisions in title I of the Affordable Health Choices Act affecting health insurance coverage would result in a net increase in federal deficits of about $1.0 trillion for fiscal years 2010 through 2019. That estimate primarily reflects the subsidies that would be provided to purchase coverage through the new insurance exchanges, which would amount to nearly $1.3 trillion in that period..."

[lindisfarne]

12. I'm sure Dean is well informed. He doesn't see much of a difference between

public option & SPHC. I agree. I know you don't. We've discussed this in other threads. I'm happy to skip restating everything and agree to disagree.

I'm a pragmatist on this issue - I want an plan that improves health coverage but that can realistically get passed. I also don't see SPHC as the only good option.

You're a purist. You see SPHC as the only option.

We won't agree.
:hi:

[slipslidingaway]

13. The price tag and the fact that some will most likely not

be covered can is a big difference.

I think SPHC is the best system to cover everyone at the lowest cost and deserves to be debated, not dismissed.

But if Dean says there is not much of a difference between the options, then I guess he must be right.

:hi:

[kenny blankenship]

19. He knows the difference. He is prevaricating and pretending not to know.

You have just had the difference EXPLAINED to you. If you really don't think there's an essential difference there, then you wouldn't have any problems saying you are for "single payer".
But you do have problems.

So there is an essential difference, and lying won't make it go away.

[redqueen]

20. Perhaps the most salient difference is one can get through congress... maybe.

The other... not a snowball's chance in hell.

Just a guess.

[PHIMG]

14. ERRRR - WRONG. Fail Doctor Dean.

Single Payer is a known quantity, in a bill you can READ and JUDGE. The public option is vague idea. Who know's what it will become?

Single Payer wipes away private insurers and their waste (saving hundreds of billions.)

Public Option accommodates the private insurers and allows them to live on to undermine the "public option."

We need to do away the criminal private insurers.

We should all be screaming for Single Payer so that the insurers accept the public option for hopes of holding single payer at bay for another 20 years. But I think we'll get it in 4.

[HamdenRice]

15. HOWARD DEAN YOU ARE NOW DEAD TO ME!!11!

:rofl:

Purer than even Howard Dean on health care now are we? What's next throwing Kucinich under the bus if he ends up supporting public option?

[PHIMG]

16. Only a sycophant would consider correcting a public figure throwing them under the bus.

[T_L_W]

17. but the problem is

that for single payer to work and not bankrupt the country, everyone has to be in.

[slipslidingaway]

21. Yes...welcome to DU :) n/t

[redqueen]

18. I need to update my sig... 347K people have signed now.

:kick:

[slipslidingaway]

22. Updated poll - questions also relate to financing reform...

which is a big difference between the plans.

http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/kaiserpolls061609nr.cfm

"Disagreement Remains on Willingness to Pay for Health Reform

With financing health reform looming as a key challenge, the survey focused several questions on this issue.


The public remains divided in their willingness to pay more to expand coverage to the uninsured, with a slight majority (54%) saying they are not personally willing to pay more to expand coverage.

Six in ten Americans (60%) continue to say that if policymakers made the right changes the health care system could be reformed without spending more money to do it.

Slightly more than half (54%) of Americans oppose taxing the employer sponsored health benefits of those with the most generous plans (compared to 63% among those insured by an employer).

Roughly two-thirds (67%) oppose across-the-board increases on income taxes.

On a few financing options there is some agreement. A narrow majority supports taxing soda (53%) and unhealthy snack foods (55%). Clear majorities support increased taxes on the wealthy (68%), cigarettes (68%) and alcoholic beverages (67%) as a way to pay for health reform.

“With all the talk of inefficiencies in the system and achieving future savings, the public may confuse the potential for long-term savings with the need for short-term outlays and think that health care can be reformed for free. This could make policymakers’ jobs tougher when the price tag for the legislation comes out,” Altman said..."

[dwilso40641]

23. I don't understand,

Can't people see that the insurance companies are robbing us? How else could they pay ceo's multi million dollar salaries and still have enough left over to buy the House and Senate.

[slipslidingaway]

24. Yes, but they still want a choice. I'm all for choice when there are

sufficient funds to do so, unfortunately my belief is that the US does not have the extra money.

Nice graph here showing campaign contributions in 2008 shifting to the Dems.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8478439&mesg_id=8478439