I am also sure the current crop of congress weasels will "enhance" and "improve" ObamaCare to such an extent that single-payer socialized medicine will appear to be downright wonderful.
This is what I foresee. The Rs pushing the short term plans are just as bad as the Ds pushing the kitchen sink plans.
I was looking at the alternative plans for Idaho, and while yeah, they are way cheaper than what I have now (like $200/mo vs $700/mo), they cover pretty much nothing and have like $10K/yr maximum payouts.
I could deal with, and in fact prefer them not covering minor Doctor visits and even minor surgical procedures, but the one thing I'm always afraid of, especially as I get older, is getting the cancer, or even just getting hit by a bus. Those $10k/yr plans would wipe me out and have me living under a bridge. Between the two choices, I'm stuck with the Obama kitchen sink plan. I'll never use my maternity coverage, but it will at least cover me if I'm stuck in a hospital for half a year.
I again go into rant mode that we need true and simple catastrophic care policies at a reasonable price. Instead, one side of the aisle gives a lump of coal plan, while the other side gives us diamond encrusted plans. One can't help but think if there was a free market there would be some options in between the two.
But yeah, sooner or later we'll see single payer. Which, ironically, might bring some form of "free market" back. My dad has Medicare. He thinks it sucks even though he never goes to the doctor. He's afraid if he really needs insurance it won't be enough. So he pays Blue Cross $200/mo for enhanced coverage (like the aforementioned being hit by a bus). Maybe if we end up in single payer, a market will be created to allow people to pay private insurance some reasonable monthly amounts for better service. Which I guess has sorta happened in some European countries, where people pay extra so they don't have to stand in the socialized medicine line.