Krugman's right…

…again.

...The Clinton plan actually preserved a big role for private insurers; the industry attacked it all the same. And the plan's complexity, which was largely a result of attempts to placate interest groups, made it hard to sell to the public. So I would argue that good economics is also good politics: reformers will do best with a straightforward single-payer plan, which offers maximum savings and, unlike the Clinton plan, can easily be explained.

We need to do this one right. If reform fails again, we'll be on the way to a radically unequal society, in which all but the most affluent Americans face the constant risk of financial ruin and even premature death because they can't pay their medical bills.

Single payer is the only health care alternative that makes sense financially, medically and socially, and it's the only one with an existing, identifiable constituency. That's why the Clinton plan was a foolishly undertaken setback for universal health care in the United States, and why it's important for the Party leadership to get behind something like the late, great McDermott/Wellstone plan.

As a middle class American who can't afford health insurance and can't access poverty-based programs, this one's personal, but we are legion...