(Old business; I'm cleaning out my backlog of "To be writtens.")
"Medicare for All," as advocated by the social democrats and democratic 
socialists, means universal coverage without out-of-pocket expenses. The
 Sanders proposal can be read at https://live-berniesanders-com.pantheonsite.io/issues/medicare-for-all/. What would be covered and how the system would be funded is spelled out. 
"A
 method to stop price gouging by insurers and providers with market 
power." But this is why the insurance companies were brought on board; 
without guarantees that their profits would be maintained, even 
increased, they would have made the plan impossible to pass; it barely 
passed as it was.
As of 2017, the CDC found that 28.9 million Americans had no health plan. Full report: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/insur201805.pdf.
The
 ACA has huge coverage gaps (one of the largest is due to the Roberts 
Court.) Once people have enough income for the system to require 
insurance, the expenses fall mostly on working poor and lower 
middle-income people. This could, of course, be changed, but it would 
require either price regulation or higher taxes, both of which are going
 to be difficult.
The health insurance companies used to have 
full-time employees devoted to finding reasons to deny care to cancer 
patients, and other high-cost insureds. I see no reason beyond 
expediency to give those businesses anything – they've made their pile. 
Capitalism-worship is the only reason they still exist.
Considering
 pragmatic politics, I don't see good solutions to any of this. We need 
to fight to keep what we have, however poor it is. I don't want to lose 
the ACA trying to get something better. And the fight divides the 
opposition to the fascists.
Government funded health care will put all the insurers out of their main business but there is room for add ons that the government need not cover. Dental, optical, pharmacy, ambulance, private rooms etc. Hospitals need to be put on a non-profit basis again.
ReplyDelete