Edwards was also the only candidate who said that, without doubt, taxes would have to be raised to pay for the $90-120 billion price tag on his plan for universal coverage. Anybody saying otherwise, he said, is likely trying to sell the voters the "Brooklyn Bridge." Senator Barack Obama didn't rule out raising taxes, saying he would do "whatever it takes" to get universal coverage by the end of his first term but wasn't specific. Edwards' plan, first unveiled earlier this year, calls for an expansion of both public and private health plans, forces employers to either provide health care or pay into a fund that does, mandates individuals to buy insurance and offers government subsidies for families with incomes of up to $80k who can't afford it.

Edwards has a very realistic shot at making universal health care a reality, because he is being very realistic up front, both about the cost of universal health care and about the implementation.

What he is advocating will force private insurance companies that are profit machines to compete against a lean, efficient government program -- Health Markets that include a public plan based on Medicare. The private plans will have to slash their greed or go out of business, and either way, the people benefit. And by keeping employers involved in coverage, that prevents the private plans from scooping up just the healthiest people; employers can't discriminate between their employees based upon health.

The best part is that Edwards is selling the American people on the idea that some things are worth higher taxes (especially on the wealthier people who can afford to pay them). When he gets elected, Edwards will have the political clout to make universal health care happen, and to pay for it with the right source of revenue -- because he had the courage to run on it.

That means we can expect this: "The American people have spoken," President Edwards said today as Congress debated the Health Care For Every American bill, which is expected to pass this week and be on its way to the president's desk, despite bitter opposition from the Republican minority.

Hillary Clinton also made a spirited presentation to the hundreds of audience members brought in by forum co-sponsor, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), but she was more vague in how she would achieve universal coverage. She put her emphasis instead on ending the "discrimination" exercised by insurance companies when they exclude or disenroll policyholders. "Every health insurance company will have to insure everybody with no exclusions for pre-existing conditions," she said.

Vague, and fails to address the underlying problem: Greed. So insurers would have to cover everyone? They'll just charge more, and make sure their profit margins aren't affected. Clinton says she will have universal health care by the end of her second term. Sure. So it's obviously not a high priority, and if she doesn't get re-elected, she won't even try. Great.

Barack Obama, who has suffered from accusations that he deals too much in platitudes and not enough in concrete offerings, came to the forum surprisingly unarmed with details. He admitted that he has not yet finalized a plan but promises one will be forthcoming, Instead he listed a number of "principles" that would guide him toward covering all Americans. "The basic principles," he said, "are everybody is in it, there has to be more money for prevention, and some form of pooling of costs and risks. If we have another forum in a few months and my plan is still not on my website, I will be in trouble."

Vague, although I guess it's good to hear that universal health care does mean "everybody is in it." Prevention is good, but there's not a clear challenge to the status of insurance companies as, first and foremost, profitable parasites that drain money from our health care system. Creating state-run Health Markets, as Edwards proposes, issues that challenge clearly. Hopefully, when Obama gets around to hammering out some details, his plan will demonstrate that he not only understands the problem, but has the political courage to address it.

SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger along with former Bill Clinton aide and current head of the Center for American Progress John Podesta met with the press after the forum to offer their evaluations. Both were excessively cautious and non-committal praising all of the candidates for now being more specific. When I asked Podesta to be specific about which new specifics he heard he answered only in vague terms. Another high-ranking West Coast SEIU official, speaking to me off the record, said: "If the election were held today, we'd be supporting Edwards. When he comes into town he asks what he can do for us. Hillary asks us what we can do for her."

In 2004, the SEIU was an early endorser of Howard Dean and by the end of the general campaign had put $65 million into pro-Democratic campaigns. "This time around I can tell you it's not going to be less than $65 million," Burger told me, referring to the '08 campaign. SEIU will not, however, endorse a Democratic candidate until this coming September.

Here is a Daily Kos diary with podcasts of each candidate's presentation at the forum.