Well, that's some type of democracy having some effect, yeah. But I was taking issue with the specific idea you put forward that good healthcare ideas would lik

Well, that's some type of democracy having some effect, yeah. But I was taking issue with the specific idea you put forward that good healthcare ideas would likely spread (in today's political environment) through the "laboratories of democracy" that are the states. It sounds good in theory; it's not so good if it doesn't happen in practice and you're poor and sick in Mississippi. You and I can move (and likely would have health care regardless). They mostly can't. EDIT: also, I think this framing can badly mislead us: "If the people Mississippi don't want single-payer health care, and the people in California do, …". We get a picture in our head of Mississippi residents monolithically not wanting it while Californians monolithically do. In actuality it may be that 49% of Mississippi residents want it and 51% of Californians do. This is of course a broader topic (the benefits and failings of democracy and of various electoral systems) but I do think it's worth being aware when certain ways of phrasing might distort. EDIT2: I don't at all mean to imply that your framing was intended to mislead; I don't think that at all.