@drunkCatholic - Actually I do "get" the public option as I have been following this debate very closely.@TimtheTaxMan - General fund money may be used to set up the public option initially, but that's covered in the cost of the bill. After that it's funded entirely by premiums. Since the CBO has projected that the bills currently going through congress end up reducing the deficit over 10 years, the cost of the bill (and thus the initial taxpayer money used to set up any public option) will be recouped with the savings.@darkened - um, no? You're describing a medicare-like system. In such a system as you describe it (ie, similar to public schools), it would be free for anybody to go to the doctor, and the government would pay the doctor with money collected through taxes. That's what happens with kids and teachers, that's what they have in Canada for doctors, and what we have for people over 65. US Seniors on Medicare are free to use their own money to pay for procedures not covered by Medicare, which would be analogous to choosing a private school in your description. I personally would be fine with such a system, however THIS DOES NOT DESCRIBE THE PUBLIC OPTION in the bills currently moving through congress. The Public Option is a non-profit insurance option paid for by premiums, not taxes. You still have to pay for it just like you do private insurance.@scamper22 - Tax money will be used to pay for the public option indirectly, however this is money that is also available to private insurers. This may sound like I'm backtracking on what I said earlier, but I'm not. The government isn't saying "Here's Tax money, public option, because you're run by the government". The tax money I'm talking about is Medicaid. So the government is saying "Hey poor people, here's some tax credits you can use to purchase insurance with. Go pick whatever insurance you want with it, you can choose the Public Option if you want to"- basically it's tax money to help poor people pay their premiums. So if the Medicaid recipients choose private insurance, the private insurers get that money. If they choose the public option, it goes back to the government. Without a public option 100% of that tax money goes to private insurers. Now, the health reform bills currently moving through congress make these credits available to more people, however that has nothing at all to do with the public option.@jpop - I'm not familiar with Hawaii's system, however that is an impossible scenario for the public option as currently under discussion. It WOULD be a possible result if the public option were paid for with a set amount of the budget every year (as it sounds like Hawaii's was), but as I've already covered it's paid for by premiums paid by people that choose it, not by the government. So the more people that choose it, the more money it has. So how can it run out of money? It actually works better the more people that join it, because not everybody requires medical attention all the time, therefore some people are paying premiums and not getting sick. Because the public option would be non-profit, 100% of money taken in by premiums and not given out to pay doctors would then go to reducing the premiums you have to pay. That's the whole idea of making it run by the federal government instead of co-ops or run by states, etc. - the more people the better it performs. That's also the reason that I believe that limiting the public option availability to those unable to get private insurance - which is what is currently proposed - is a mistake. Senator Ron Wyden agrees, and is also a proponent of letting anybody into the public option if they want it.Please, keep 'em coming. I like correcting people's misconceptions.