This is not another attempt to simply slam the President for misspeaking... a few times, about grandfathering of previous healthcare plans, it's honestly not.

However, I am sure even the most progressive among our ranks who are probably not that interested in rollout difficulties at the moment are probably acquainted with this development:

Clinton says President should honor his statement to let people keep their healthcare plans:

This title of this thread was written in a deliberate fashion to catch the attention of Democrats on the defensive though. I'm actually playing the devil's advocate to myself here and offering suggestions that may be costly to my desires.

What are your thoughts on the bill in the house to allow people to keep their healthcare plans?

I do not have all of the numbers in front of me, but I am under the distinctive impression that the arithmetic won't play out very well if this law passes, effectively making the cost untenable if additional revenues are not acquired somehow.

How to go about that? Well I see a couple of methods, the default go to one seems to be adjusting tax rates, which is questionably effective depending on how it's implemented. I do know that will not help these PR issues the Democrats are encountering with the rollout. Another method is just to let the extra debt build, I do not think that will go over well. One additional method is to leave it to the free market, that will essentially allow the ACA approved plans to adjust their pricing to accommodate the lack of revenues. Of course this simply means the prices will rise to handle the additional cost burden, by how much is to be seen.

If I were a savvy progressive who wishes to at least retain political share in government, I would definitely consider the third option as a viable method. This bill has a high probability of causing the ACA to tank disastrously, if the Democratic PR network managed to convince the average American that the shutdown was a Tea Party shutdown, placing blame on Republicans this time should be childplay by comparison. This is also, in my perspective, the ticket to get the single payer system many of you desire. When the average voter sees the prices rise on this level, it will not be difficult to convince them the pricing can be set lowest with government at the helm and that the single payer system will be the solution to this rise in prices. Will it work? It depends where the voting numbers lie.

I do think this is Clinton's angle in all of this, he may be distancing himself from Obama to usher in Hillary and single payer healthcare. The timing would workout well, if Democrats can hold the Senate and maybe gain some positions in the house in 2014 and 2016 the timetable would probably work out very well for it. Obviously there's a certain amount of risk-taking involved here, and obviously the question of whether Reid would cooperate and the President would use his veto authority. Much like the fracturing of the "Right" in October, we are beginning to see similar things now with the "Left".

Should Democrats stand behind this healthcare law, or is it time to allow the transition many of you seek?