With the Two-Check proposal, we are getting closer to my idea for writing a separate check for supplemental plans if you want coverage for abortion and other controversial and experimental treatments that I've written about many times here:
Ellen Goodman, meet French "Mutuals"
Mandated funding for organ transplants?
What gets covered by Public Option?
I found $1.6 Billion per year of savings
So, we're at the point now where everyone is going to be writing a separate check to a private insurer if they want abortion coverage, why not counter-offer single-payer for the public portion, so that no one has to sign up with any insurer or worry about paying premiums or writing any checks, unless they want coverage for abortion, non-generic drugs, ivf, stem cell therapies, and whatever else it takes to compromise on what is included in the single payer universal plan.
The current plan on the table is not the final destination, right? But rather than fighting on for public abortion coverage, why not fight on for Single-payer?
I really think you only read half the comments here. I don’t usually like speaking for others, but I believe Ryan (Ryepower12), NeilSagan, BrooklineTom, are single-payer advocates, as am I. I for one have been less interested overall in the abortion aspect of the debate.
I know everyone is a single-payer advocate, but when they also insist on blank checks for research and funding for unethical and controversial things like abortion and ivf, they make single-payer impossible.
<
p>When you say you’re “less interested” in the abortion aspect, that’s a start, I suppose, to what I am getting at, because I guess you are saying there that you would trade abortion coverage for single-payer. It’d be good if you would actually say that, and to extend it to ivf and research funding and other futuristic priorities that the public shouldn’t be forced to support at maximum levels and at the expense of their basic health and future.
You will also very rarely hear me say “(insert policy preference here) or bust!” That’s just not my personality or the way I play politics.
If we could get single-payer by reducing what single-payer covered, and having private plans for stuff that single-payer didn’t cover, would you consider that approach?