Several candidates from the left wing of the Democratic Party are running on the idea. In the Washington Post, I write that its deficiencies become glaringly obvious any time the debate moves beyond slogans. I go through several of those deficiencies and then pose the question: What’s the point of destroying hundreds of millions of people’s private insurance plans anyway?

If most people are happy with their coverage, why should the government abolish their plans? What’s the vital public purpose that justifies this federally imposed disruption to people’s health care arrangements?

If most people are happy with their coverage, why should the government abolish their plans? What’s the vital public purpose that justifies this federally imposed disruption to people’s health care arrangements?

© National Review