Yes, the legal way is to change the laws.

Unfortunately that is rolling a boulder uphill, and even if you fire all of Congress (on this issue, you'd need to get rid of all the Republicans and at least a third of the Democrats) and replace it with people who give a crap, all it takes is one executive to stop enforcing the rules.

> you'd need to get rid of all the Republicans and at least a third of the Democrats

And then most voters: “71% of U.S. adults consider the quality of healthcare they receive to be excellent or good, and 65% say the same of their own coverage. There has been little deviation in these readings since 2001” [1].

[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/654044/view-healthcare-quality-...

Quality of healthcare and quality of insurance experience are not the same statistic.

I'm very satisfied with my healthcare. I am not satisfied with my insurer.

> Quality of healthcare and quality of insurance experience are not the same statistic

The question was specifically about “the quality of healthcare you receive/your healthcare coverage.” Coverage doesn’t cover the insurer on cost, but it does on claims denials.

Most Americans like their coverage. If you want to reform the system, you have to start with that fact and convince them they aren’t risking what they have unnecessarily.

> the quality of healthcare you receive/your healthcare coverage

But that's two different things.

If you put me in a giant mansion with a $100k/month mortgage, I will be quite satisified with my house. Very briefly.

>Most Americans like their coverage

Even more Americans (81%!) are unhappy with the cost of their coverage.

Sure. We want the same system but cheaper. That’s an important difference for someone advocating to scrap the system to make it cheaper. We want those lower costs. But loss aversion marries us to the good enough.

The same system but cheaper is not the same system. There are leeches that need to be removed from the system.

> same system but cheaper is not the same system

Correct. You've identified why this debate has been frozen in American politics for decades. One man's leech is another's adored Cadillac insurance policy, trusted provider or prescribed placebo. Healthcare reform keeps dying on the rocks of conspiracy theories about the Congress of whatnot. The problem is surfacing a solution the electorate trusts and endorses.

> One man's leech is another's adored Cadillac insurance policy, trusted provider or prescribed placebo.

No, the plans aren’t leeches, the people using the plans aren’t leeches, the entire administrative / leadership staff at health insurance orgs are the leeches.

A majority of the electorate wants government provided healthcare.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/468401/majority-say-gov-ensure-...

> A majority of the electorate wants government provided healthcare

No. (Come on, read your own source.)

A majority say "it is the responsibility of the federal government to make sure all Americans have healthcare coverage." There is a 10-point preference for a "system based on private insurance" versus a "government-run system."

79% of Democrats want a government-run system. But only 46% of independents and 13% of Republicans. Which explains the gridlock. If one side only proposes government-provided healthcare as its solution, it will waste a bunch of energy on it and then be predictably shot down.

"19% -- say they are satisfied with its cost"

From your link.