According to Dr. Robert McLean, president of the group, "We think there is a realistic chance that either of these two approaches could get us to a much, much better place. It is not looking to be partisan, but I would say it is unavoidably political because policy is political."

The group joins the large portion of the U.S. population that supports a transformation of the health care system; according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, about half of U.S. adults are in favor of a national Medicare for All plan, with even more—two thirds—hoping for a public option.

Naturally enough, health insurers and other industry groups are opposed to such an idea.

The ACP came up with its recommendation after analysis of the problems with the current system—high cost, coverage gaps, variable quality and overwhelming complexity—to see what solutions might best solve those problems. The end result will have to deal with all of them, and according to McLean, a piecemeal approach just won't work.

McLean he was critical of Republican efforts to encourage patients to be better consumers of health care can't solve the problem because they fail to address coverage gaps and do not guarantee comprehensive benefits.

Members of the ACP are internal medicine specialists who focus on adult patients ranging in age from workers covered by employer plans to Medicare recipients.

Read more: 

• 9 ways to finance Medicare for All, none of which look that great
• Health insurers mount battle against Medicare for All
• The call for universal health care is getting louder