The minimum standard acceptable for a Public Option

[ThomWV]

If there is a Public Option it must be comparable to private insurance. I suggest this minimum for the Public Option, should it come into existence.

First it must cover everything covered by all of the competing private insurance available - every procedure, every medicine, every consultation, transportation, physical, mental, dental, everything. If its covered in any private plan then it has to be included in the Public Plan. Next, it must cost less than any private plan; if this needs to be accomplished by subsidy, then so be it, but in no case can the cost of the Public Option exceed that of any private insurance no matter if the private policy includes less coverage than the Public Option.

That's my version, what's yours?

[derby378]

1. If you want the public option to match coverage from the big boys...

...I'm afraid it'll have to charge as much as the big boys. The good news is that you can never be deprived of the public option.

[ThomWV]

2. as much as the big boys minus (profit, lobbying fees, bonuses, and payoffs)

[derby378]

3. I get it now

:hi:

[Orsino]

4. "Comparable," but better.

No insurance company death boards, no denial of coverage, and affordable--which means free for at least the neediest of us.

However, you used the word "acceptable." Given that I'm not going to get the pony I just described, I will say that I'd accept anything in the interim that gets more people more coverage, without much more financial burden, as a small victory. I'm willing to accept that real health reform won't be accomplished all at once, as long as we keep working for the reform we need.

So, "comparable," with comparisons inevitably highlighting the superiority of not-for-profit health care.