The Washington
Post dealt a blow to a liberal pipe dream Sunday when the outlet’s
editorial board highlighted the problems with single-payer health care —
arguing that it would be “astonishingly” expensive unless doctors are paid less
and Americans are prepared to “accept different standards of access and
comfort.”
The piece, called “Single-payer health care would have an
astonishingly high price tag” comes days after California’s Senate approved a single-payer system for the state
earlier this week, without having specified how it will pay for the estimated
$400 billion price tag.
Single-payer health care
systems, such as those seen in Europe and Canada, have always been popular with
the liberal wing of American politics, with top liberal Sens. Bernie Sanders
(I-VT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) calling for such systems in America. President Barack
Obama also publicly supported single-payer when he was a senator.
The Post editorial
is certainly sympathetic to those aspirations, arguing that such models are
simpler for patients and employers. However, it says “the government’s price
tag would be astonishing.”
When Sen. Bernie Sanders
(I-Vt.) proposed a “Medicare for all” health plan in his presidential campaign,
the nonpartisan Urban Institute figured that it would raise
government spending by $32 trillion over 10 years, requiring a tax increase so
huge that even the democratic socialist Mr. Sanders did not propose anything
close to it.
Countering the argument of
single-payer advocates that government-run systems tend to be more
cost-efficient than the American system, the Post says the
reason for that is political, blaming Republicans for framing ObamaCare’s
Medicare cuts as attacks on the program instead of reform.
The Post argues
that a single-payer system would face the same political barriers and that
consequently, the only way to make such a plan affordable would be to get
medical employees to be paid less, and to get Americans to accept lower quality
of care:
A single-payer health-care
system would face all of these political barriers to cost-saving reform and
more. To realize the single-payer dream of coverage for all and big savings,
medical industry players, including doctors, would likely have to get paid less
and patients would have to accept different standards
of access and comfort. There is
little evidence most Americans are willing to accept such tradeoffs.
The Post reiterates
that “the goal must be universal coverage and cost restraint” but that liberals
should be directing their energy to goals other than a complete government
takeover of America’s healthcare system.
There are many options short of
a disruptive takeover: the government can change how care is delivered,
determine which treatments should be covered, control quality at hospitals,
drive down drug costs and discourage high-cost health-care plans even while
making the Obamacare system better at filling coverage gaps.
Adam Shaw is a politics
reporter for Breitbart News based in New York. Follow Adam on Twitter: @AdamShawNY
No comments:
Post a Comment