The point is, if someone doesn't want the government's medically necessary coverage, they have no choice but to use it because any other solution would be illegal. That's a hard sell especially when you can't answer the questions @DC_Dude asked.That's not quite accurate. Most Medicare for All proposals would make the public plan the primary insurer for medically necessary care, but they don't prohibit people from spending their own money on services that aren't covered. The main point of limiting duplicate private insurance is to avoid creating a two-tier system where wealthier people can bypass the public system for the same covered care.
Whether that's good policy is a legitimate debate, but saying "you can't have private health insurance" oversimplifies the issue. Many countries with universal healthcare still have private insurance, although it's often limited to supplemental benefits, faster access for certain services, or amenities rather than replacing the public system.
And they can't stop wealthy people from having a two tiered system. Hell, look up concierge care. They're already bypassing insurance altogether.
It's simple enough to say that you're creating a universal health plan that everyone can use and everyone pays into but you can continue to use the existing system if you want to.
If the MFA system is as good as hoped, it will put private insurance out of business organically. But making part of the law about eliminating the option of using private health insurance for most things means that bill is not just about getting people healthcare, and you're not completely confident people will like the system.
And I'm for single payer, universal health care. I just know people react viscerally when they are forced to do something and their options are taken away.