Much like Physicians for a National Health Care Program, I have always been and continue to be a huge proponent of Medicare for all. It is the simplest way to guarantee affordable health care for all. That said, I am with Paul Krugman and other policy experts in calling for Medicare for those who choose it as the next major health care reform initiative. Here’s why.
Passing a law that requires tens of millions of Americans to give up their current health insurance is more than likely to cause a huge public backlash. The corporate health insurance industry will do everything in its power to ensure that. For that reason alone, even some of the more progressive Democrats are not likely to buy into Medicare for all, as much as they say they support it.
In addition, a large cohort of Americans today do not trust the government. And, while they might like Medicare, they are likely to want to take their time before embracing it for themselves. Foisting Medicare onto them, without giving them a chance to choose it for themselves makes no sense. In order to get to Medicare for all, there’s a need for a multi-year transition, the best design of which would be to offer Medicare to anyone who chooses it.
Medicare for all would require regulating hospital, physician and prescription drug rates, as well as the cost of medical supplies and equipment. Many of those rates will have to come down appreciably, and they should. At the same time, to ensure the health and well-being of hospitals and physicians as well as health care administrators, that should happen slowly. That’s why Medicare for all legislation always has included a three or four-year transition period.
Medicare for those who choose it opens up the door to enrolling in Medicare for anyone who wants it without the same destabilizing effects of Medicare for all. Physicians for a National Health Plan (PNHP) claims that the sickest and most expensive Americans will enroll in Medicare, endangering the program. That does not need to be the case. It’s easy enough to design a voluntary Medicare program in ways that protect it against adverse risk.
Medicare for those who choose it is next best to Medicare for all, because it will not end a lot of the waste in a multi-payer system. But, today, with Medicare only available to people over 65 and people with disabilities, it is still far more cost-effective than private insurance and operates with far less waste. A voluntary Medicare program would reduce considerable waste, if not as much as Medicare for all.
Lastly, Medicare for those who choose it would reduce people’s health care costs by as much as 30 percent, while offering comprehensive coverage. It does not achieve as great savings or make health care as affordable as Medicare for all. But, it gives Americans an alternative to high-priced private health insurance. If it works as well as traditional Medicare, it should create a hunger for Medicare for all.
Here’s more from Just Care:
- Medicare for All gains big support from second largest doctors’ group
- Government agency finds Medicare for all saves money
- Medicare for those who choose it, a first step to guaranteed affordable health care for all
- Medicare for all would save $600 billion a year in administrative costs
- Health care prices are rising, but not for Medicare
