AOC shares perfect explanation of how US healthcare tricks consumers

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has taken some heat for saying that 66 health insurance options is too much, but the liberal congresswoman is doubling down on her claim.

On Monday, the New York congresswoman retweeted a thread composed by Wendell Potter, a former health insurance executive who claims he helped draft the insurance industry talking point about consumer choice — and that the argument is “a trap” created by the insurance industry itself.

“When I worked in the insurance industry, we were instructed to talk about ‘choice,’ based on focus groups,” Mr Potter, who previously worked as a vice president for the company Cigna, began his thread, before noting that there “was a problem” with the thinking.

He continued: “As a health insurance PR guy, we knew one of the huge *vulnerabilities* of the current system was LACK of choice. In the current system, you can’t pick your own doc, specialist, or hospital without huge ‘out of network’ bills.”

Mr Potter continued to claim that, knowing they were at a disadvantage over the idea of choice, the insurance industry paid for lobbying and information campaigns that spun the issue in their favour. He claimed that the effort sought to impress upon American consumers that changes to the system would actually yield fewer choices, rather than make it easier to find healthcare options through universal coverage.

“The truth, of course, is you have little ‘choice’ in healthcare now. Most can’t keep their plan as long as they want, or visit any doctor or hospital. Some reforms, like Medicare For All, *would* let you,” Mr Potter, who is currently the president of the group Business for Medicare for All. “In other words, [Medicare for All] actually offers more choice than the status quo.”

The issue of choice has become increasingly salient on the 2020 campaign trail, with prominent critics of Medicare for All claiming or implying that removing the private insurance industry would mean a universal coverage scheme that denies consumers options. Among those prominent opponents of the policy include Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg.

But, supporters of the measure like Bernie Sanders, have argued that universally coverage would ultimately give consumers more choice, because there would be no out of network doctors to worry about. And, the program would reduce costs and increase security, supporters of Medicare for All argue, because coverage would not end if a job is lost or when young people turn 26.

Ms Ocasio-Cortez has endorsed Mr Sanders to become president, and has frequently used her prominent platform in American politics. She has even gone after the healthcare options that members of Congress receive, arguing that it does not make sense to present anyone with the choice between "66 complex financial options" for healthcare.

"They’re also upset that I stated 66 'choices' is too many. It is! Healthcare is not H&M. Insurance is a complex financial product for the doctor. Costs are skyrocketing largely due to the financialization of our health," Ms Ocasio-Cortez tweeted after receiving criticism for that statement. "Streamlining our system & covering more isn’t a bad thing."