I'm breaking silence just because Gar has been saying a lot of good things about having incremental reforms support single payer, and vice versa, all of which I support.
But "huge resources"? Most of these fair share campaigns are run on a shoestring, completely outmatched by the whole array of business interests fighting reform.
Working Families, for example, is hardly some well-financed operation-- they sweat blood for resources and their staff work horrendous hours for shitty pay to accomplish what they are able to do.
Maryland's Health Care for All campaign again had no giant resources in fighting their fight for fair share there.
Massachusetts Health Care for All campaign seems a bit better funded (I don't know them well) but are hardly rolling in the green.
But here's the thing-- given how few resources there are, how do you convince partners to divert resources to single payer advocacy, especially given many of those partners and foundations that aren't convinced themselves of its superiority. Most of the resources for even these incremental fights are not coming from those so commited to single payer, so they can't be diverted so easily.
Really, it's the same people putting resources into the single payer campaigns who would be the supply of funds from the incremental reforms. And there's just not that much.
Nathan Newman