What seems to be missing from this thread is the discussion of the balance between a system that is less costly for those who can presently access it v. a system that is open to all that need it. Everything government costs money. The question is whether it is appropriate, and whether the cost meets the objective. I think everyone here feels that adequate health care is critical, and everyone should have access to it. As a number of you have pointed out, it is unclear whether it will cost much more than the legislation predicts. Given the incredible need, we should at least see whether or not it is cost prohibitive. The data from California is encouraging, if not complete. Medicare Part C was confusing as hell at first, and may still be so, but it is working, and I doubt there are many seniors who wish it was never created.