AOC is responding to her constituency but not the entirety of the Dems, many of whom are very attached to their job-related private insurance. Trying to supplant private health insurance w/M-Care for all will not fly...guaranteed. Americans love private health insurance.
I'm not certain what she is referring to re: basic healthcare. Low income people qualify for Medicaid. Lower income seniors qualify for both M-Care/M-Aid which is a fairly lush benefit.
AOC strikes me as a short-term 'personality'. I can see her transitioning to Hollywood, broadcast news etc.
As an Australian with knowledge and experience of the US medical system, your system leaves far too many people out, far too many people dependent on seriously poor insurance that covers little and it requires that you are employed the right way by the right generous employer and it is FAR TOO expensive. It is depressing just how badly the US system is. The British NHS has its own flaws for the opposite reason so is not much better. A hybrid system of public and private is what we have in Australia and it works better than both extremes. Job related medical insurance is responsible for far too many bankruptcies and untreated medical conditions. It contributes to widely disparate life expectancies and quality of life issues across people in the USA. It only covers 56% of the population. It creates job lock and provides much less benefit to lower income people than higher income people.
On AOC: Any policitian that fails to respond to their constituency because they seek to respresent only what people think a whole broadly based party should represent deserves to be removed from office at their first re-election. All parties need to be a mix of individuals, not cookie cutter clones.
I agree with some of what you say, but I am saying many Dems have private health insurance through work. There would be a revolt if that was touched because Americans with private insurance are quite spoiled. These voters would not agree to an immediate transition to 'M-Care for all'
There will likely be an incremental change around the edges.
Many of the government plans are managed by private insurance, with success, as costs were sky-rocketing. The coverage is good and there is outreach and outpatient services. The insurance co. is given a lump sum per patient and they need to provide preventive care, outreach, hospitalization etc. Many with chronic conditions are followed closely by by case mgrs such as myself.
Some patients opt out of these plans and are not well-managed, but they do have gov't insurance.
This is often a non-compliant group.
Seniors over 65 have Medicare with a supplemental privately-paid insurance which is affordable and high quality. (80-20% ratio) $225/mo.
One does have to pay a bit more for Vision. Dental is not provided.
Lower income seniors have Med-care/M-Aid and they do better.
I work as an RN Case Manager and know about this intimately as I wear both the nurse and business hats.
Many companies profit from the US medical system as well, so change will come very slowly
AOC's constituency may include a number of 'illegals' as well. Americans are ambivalent about providing coverage for this group.
[Edited 11/25/20 22:14pm]
[Edited 11/25/20 22:15pm]