My blog-buddy ST has a great post on the Nevada Senator’s admission of what many of us have known all along: that Obamacare is meant to pave the way for a complete nationalization of the US health care system.
From the Las Vegas Sun:
In just about seven weeks, people will be able to start buying Obamacare-approved insurance plans through the new health care exchanges.
But already, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is predicting those plans, and the whole system of distributing them, will eventually be moot.
Reid said he thinks the country has to “work our way past” insurance-based health care during a Friday night appearance on Vegas PBS’ program “Nevada Week in Review.”
“What we’ve done with Obamacare is have a step in the right direction, but we’re far from having something that’s going to work forever,” Reid said.
When then asked by panelist Steve Sebelius whether he meant ultimately the country would have to have a health care system that abandoned insurance as the means of accessing it, Reid said: “Yes, yes. Absolutely, yes.”
None of this is new to long-term readers of this blog (all three of you). The dominant progressive wing of the (Social) Democratic Party see this as a win-win situation: either the Affordable Care Act works well enough for people to accept it, in which case the Democrats can gradually massage it into something wholly state-run, or it will have so many problems that the public will demand it be fixed. In this event, so the theory goes, the public, being already dependent on some aspects of Obamacare, will be open to a Socialist (government-run, single payer) solution. It’s the idea of the non-reforming reform: changes supposedly meant to make things better, but are really intended to cause a crisis in the system that the Left can exploit to pursue their real goal.
And Harry Reid just admitted it.
Be sure to read the rest of ST’s post, wherein she cites several (Social) Democrats saying the same thing. Good thing they had the media on their side, hiding this from the public.
RELATED: Apologists for Obamacare prefer to ignore the horror stories coming out of Great Britain’s NHS (much admired by single-payer advocate Donald Berwick) and point instead to Canada, which has a strictly single-payer system. They might want to read this article from City Journal. Admittedly now a few years old, it describes the major problems Canada’s system faces, including rationing and a lack of innovation. Even a Canadian provincial premier sought care in the US, outside his own country’s vaunted single payer system