policy is set from the top.

But single payer advocates have every right not to support a watered down version of the original public option idea proposed by Jacob Hacker. Even more so when they were excluded from the WH summit and saw they would have no input in getting what they considered a good bill. They had been engaged in discussions and knew more about what was going on behind the scenes than most of us here on DU.

As noted below by the end of 2007 the basic structure of how health care reform would proceed was being determined...they were expected to get with the program.



Here is what Dr. McCanne of PNHP said in January 2007...

“Jacob Hacker’s proposal is a very welcome addition at a time that all options should be on the table. It is such a compelling model that it may shove all others off of the table - except single payer - then we can get down to a serious discussion about reform that really works.”

page 10
http://www.ourfuture.org/files/documents/e...


In contrast with the above quote here is what was taking place at the end of 2007 and the beginning of 2008...

Posted on January 2, 2008
Where are we on reform? Part 2 (Hacker)

Health Reform Lessons from the Past
Jacob Hacker, PhD
National Conference on the Un and Underinsured
December 12, 2007 (Day 3)


"...Comment:
By Don McCanne, MD

The final Quote of the Day for 2007 discussed the disconnect between a new poll indicating strong support (65%) for “a universal health insurance program in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers,” and a rapidly growing movement within the progressive community to support a model based on allowing you to keep the insurance you have.

...Jacob Hacker has described very accurately the politics of health care reform. He has suggested an approach that, on surface, would appear to lead to affordable coverage for everyone, while passing the crucial test of political feasibility. His political message is very sound - in fact, so sound that the leading Democratic candidates have adopted his suggestions. He has stressed the importance of coalition building well in advance of the installation of a new government one year from now.

So what coalition activities are we seeing within the progressive community? Many respected, influential leaders state that it is time to set aside the policy debate and proceed with a political strategy that will achieve our reform goals. There is one major problem with this approach: most of the difficult policy issues have yet to be addressed. But several of these coalition leaders have told the policy community quite bluntly that the policy debate is over, and all of the activities now must be about unity. We are commanded to unify behind health care reform that promises that you can keep the insurance you have or have the option to buy into a public program.

That’s it. That’s the policy behind which we are to unify. For the sake of unity, we are not to talk about the inability of the private insurance industry to provide us with affordable health plans that are comprehensive enough to meet our health care needs. We are not to talk about a public insurance program that must provide a premium that is competitive with private plans insuring the healthy, when the public plan is weighted down with high-cost patients (adverse selection).

....Those who insist on unity behind political means while suppressing clarity about policy ends will not be successful in coalition building, and clearly that is not Jacob Hacker’s intent. Those of us who insist on clarity about policy ends will be there to be certain that efforts to compromise on means will be an honest, transparent, and fully informed process."