House Speaker Nancy Pelosi came under fire from single-payer proponents Thursday after she deployed what one healthcare policy expert described as \u0022probably the most dishonest argument in the entire Medicare for All debate.\u0022\u0022People who love their employer-based insurance do not get to hold on to it in our current system. Instead, they lose that insurance constantly, all the time. It is a complete nightmare.\u0022 —Matt Bruenig, People\u0026#039;s Policy ProjectIn an interview with the Washington Post, the Democratic leader said she is \u0022agnostic\u0022 on Medicare for All and claimed, \u0022A lot of people love having their employer-based insurance and the Affordable Care Act gave them better benefits.\u0022Matt Bruenig, founder of the left-wing think tank People\u0026#039;s Policy Project, argued in a blog post that Pelosi\u0026#039;s statement \u0022implies that, under our current health insurance system, people who like their employer-based insurance can hold on to it.\u0022\u0022This then is contrasted with a Medicare for All transition where people will lose their employer-based insurance as part of being shifted over to an excellent government plan,\u0022 Bruenig wrote. \u0022But the truth is that people who love their employer-based insurance do not get to hold on to it in our current system. Instead, they lose that insurance constantly, all the time, over and over again. It is a complete nightmare.\u0022To illustrate his point, Bruenig highlighted a University of Michigan study showing that among Michiganders \u0022who had employer-sponsored insurance in 2014, only 72 percent were continuously enrolled in that insurance for the next 12 months.\u0022This means that 28 percent of people on an employer plan were not on that same plan one year later,\u0022 Bruenig noted.People Lose Their Employer-Sponsored Insurance Constantly https://t.co/PI4EwRuIDk pic.twitter.com/2JiBhhuHeV— Matt Bruenig (@MattBruenig) April 5, 2019\u0022Critics of Medicare for All are right to point out that losing your insurance sucks,\u0022 Bruenig concluded. \u0022But the only way to stop that from happening to people is to create a seamless system where people do not constantly churn on and off of insurance. Medicare for All offers that. Our current system offers the exact opposite. If you like losing your insurance all the time, then our current healthcare system is the right one for you.\u0022All On Medicare—a pro-Medicare for All Twitter account—slammed Pelosi\u0026#039;s remarks, accusing the Democratic leader of parroting insurance industry talking points:Jesus Christ, @SpeakerPelosi -- why not just let a lobbyist from @AHIPCoverage be Speaker? You literally say the same things! https://t.co/lbGe3xPX6E pic.twitter.com/DIxPRQXWR2— All On Medicare (@AllOnMedicare) April 5, 2019The Speaker\u0026#039;s alternative to the Medicare for All legislation co-sponsored by over 100 members of her caucus is a bill to strengthen the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which she introduced last week.\u0022We all share the value of healthcare for all Americans—quality, affordable healthcare for all Americans,\u0022 Pelosi told the Post. \u0022What is the path to that? I think it\u0026#039;s the Affordable Care Act, and if that leads to Medicare for All, that may be the path.\u0022The nation\u0026#039;s largest nurses union was among those who expressed disagreement with the Speaker\u0026#039;s incrementalist approach.In a statement last week, National Nurses United president Zenei Cortez, RN, said Pelosi\u0026#039;s plan would \u0022only put a Band-Aid on a broken healthcare system.\u0022\u0022National Nurses United, along with our allies, will continue to build the grassroots movement for genuine healthcare justice and push to pass Medicare for All,\u0022 Cortez concluded.