One thing that amazes me is that opponents of expanded coverage and a government option insurance program have planted the idea that what is being proposed is (1) government run medical care or (2) something equivalent to Canada's system (if only).
A sound bite that is often offered is that there will be an administrator between you and your doctor. Anyone who has ever had to deal with any serious medical issues knows that this is true of ANY insurance plan and is not a special feature of the one being proposed (which by the way allows you to keep your current health insurance if you're happy with it).
Whatever happened to honest debate?
Are there problems with the proposed plan? Well, it's going to cost quite a bit of money, but let's at least stick to the truth in the debate.
dale
@CarlM, I agree except the problem exists on both sides of this debate. The ability to see/tell the truth seems to be something politicians are not born with.
Aren't there about 4 or 5 different plans for expanded coverage any way? (and I'm glad you used the phrase expanded since I've yet to hear of any real reform other than pre-existing condition coverage). What plans are people talking about?