The AFL-CIO Debate (In Progress): Health Care

It is worth noting that the AFL-CIO endorses Kucinich's single-payer HR 676 -- Medicare for All. It is also worth noting, and terribly disappointing, that 6 of the 7 candidates on stage tonight reject it. This is, to me, the most frustrating element of this cast.

They all claim to be on the side of labor, but only Kucinich (and Gravel, who was absent tonight) actually supports their position on the nation's top domestic concern. And while Edward's has been the most populist of the big three, it is incredibly disappointing that he has proposed an individual mandate plan. And he is actually stronger on the issue that Obama and Clinton.

Jeff Cohen wants this question asked, and I think it would be a good way to frame the health care debate.

Excepting Mr. Kucinich who co-sponsors H.R. 676, please explain why you oppose “Enhanced Medicare for All.”

How many of you have seen Michael Moore’s movie, SiCKO? If you’ve seen it, do you disagree with Moore’s thesis that for-profit insurers deform our system and that healthcare is a right, not a commodity to be purchased? If you haven’t seen it, why not?

Follow up for Mr. Obama: You’ve repeatedly stated that when it comes to healthcare policy, insurance companies should get a seat at the table, but not every seat. Should Halliburton have a seat at the table when military or foreign policy is made?

Given the venue, Olberman should have asked everyone: why do you support allowing private for-profit companies run the health care system? And why are you not behind HR 676?