It is a lot easier for Democrats to scaremonger with "evil insurance companies" themes than to make people really understand what the problems are, how they will be addressed, and what will be lost in the bargain.

If the starting point is EXPANDING employment based coverage rather than reducing or replacing it entirely I don't see how any good can come out of this.

$1 trillion to be offset by reduced spending and new taxes? WTF?

Medicare to be ENHANCED (or held steady) and physician reimbursement to be ENHANCED (or held steady) while other provider reimbursements to be REDUCED all by "cutting out waste and fraud." Could someone explain how all this is supposed to work without using "right wing" or "left wing" or "single payor" or "Democrat" or "Republican" in the response?