Most of us are supporting Obamacare because there are no legislative fixes likely given the House

[CreekDog]

so even though most of us would have a stronger system than Obamacare, and in fact, most of us would prefer single payer...

we know that as legislative experts have been saying lately, the public policymaking function of the government is broken.

until it's fixed, we are unlikely to get improvements in existing laws, certainly not in laws which are the cornerstone of Obama's presidency.

that is part of the reason there are flaws in the program now, most major legislation needs many fixes, but those fixes have been denied, so the program is hobbled, yet, its core remains.

and what of the core are folks here who otherwise would prefer single payer supporting?

1. single payer in the form of vastly expanded Medicaid. it certainly isn't the ideal single payer system, but it is significantly better than that which preceded it.
2. restriction on health insurer profits
3. end of limits on coverage pertaining to preexisting conditions, cost capitations and the like
4. ending pricing of premiums according to underwriting or health conditions
5. universal or guaranteed issue of insurance --no more being refused for coverage or being dropped due to health conditions
6. subsidized coverage for many who lack it, according to income

none of these are perfect things, but they are decidedly better than what preceded them. furthermore, if legislative fixes are unlikely for this existing program now, in its absence what is the likelihood that a replacement program could be passed were this program to fail in the interim?

there are other reasons many here are supporting the program, and without going into exhaustive detail, whose who support it still include:

1. Bernie Sanders
2. Elizabeth Warren
3. Barbara Lee
and many more...

so if you're giving people a hard time about supporting Obamacare when they could be supporting single payer, you might ask yourself why someone like Bernie Sanders doesn't agree with you.

[yeoman6987]

1. Support for ACA

In 2009 when this was passed, Democrats had 60 seats. The Republicans had 40. None of the Republicans voted for the bill. So Obama was down to 60 from the start. You need 60 to pass the bill which Obama had. However, many Democrats were a little afraid of the bill. Finally they did the right thing and all 60 Democrats voted for the Bill. I wish that Obama would have added Single Payer since he had all 60 votes. He could have convinced those Democrats nervous about the bill to do the right thing like he did with the current bill. We would be in great shape had he done that. I feel sorry for Obama that 40 Republicans did not vote for the bill right out of the starting line. It is difficult to begin a bill with 60 votes. However, Obama was successful with at least getting a program started and for that we should be thankful.

[CreekDog]

2. the 60th vote was Lieberman.

that's why you are probably wrong.

Obama couldn't even get Lieberman to vote for him. What were the chances that Lieberman's opposition to the public option in the bill or the expansion of Medicare, also torpedoed by him, would've accepted a single payer option --while Lieberman's wife was a health insurance lobbyist?

zero.

what we have in Obamacare is the most that 60th vote (alternately Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, etc.) would accept.

and that's what we got. but at least we got that.

[yeoman6987]

3. Lieberman

I forgot about him. No wonder we are stuck with what we have…Oh I am glad for something but it could have been so much better. When are we every going to have 60 votes again. Lieberman pisses me off even more now because after all this, he ended up leaving politics.

[CreekDog]

4. i think the time is coming that 60 votes won't be needed

but that does us little good given the House we have now.