Al Owski’s Reviews > Medicare for All: A Citizen's Guide > Status Update

“Improving competition from generic drugs by cracking down on abuses of the patent system is a good idea that would lower prices for some medications, and these reforms should be pursued whether under M4A or under our current system.”

“Finally, a system that builds on the ACA alone is likely to remain inequitable. The ACA marketplaces separate insurance plans into four “metal levels”: platinum, gold, silver, and bronze. People who can afford platinum plans enjoy comprehensive health coverage, while people with bronze plans are saddled with deductibles so high they might not be able to afford care altogether.”

“a reform plan that only builds on the ACA lacks nearly all the active ingredients of Medicare for All: although we could approach universal coverage, coverage would not become more comprehensive, the public would not gain negotiating leverage against the healthcare industry to rein in prices, administrative efficiency would not be improved, financing would remain regressive... ”

“the failure of the Clinton reform in the 1990s led many strategists to treat incremental reform as politically necessary, as well as to favor plans that are acceptable to the healthcare industry in order to allay the all-out attacks that spoiled reform for much of the twentieth century. The Affordable Care Act is often viewed as a vindication of this political strategy... ”

“Six key elements of M4A: 1. Universal coverage. M4A guarantees health coverage to every American. 2. Comprehensive coverage. 3. Pricing power. M4A can wield its considerable negotiating leverage to rein in the cost of drugs, hospital stays, and physician services. 4. Administrative efficiency. M4A eliminates the high overhead costs of private insurance companies 5. Progressive financing. 6. Public accountability. ”

“In addition to lack of insurance... we outlined a fuller set of major problems that Americans face in our current system: our healthcare is too expensive, too many Americans can’t access the care they need, we’re sicker than we should be, and the experience of giving and receiving care is eroding.”

“M4A would also have a tremendous impact on where our healthcare dollars are spent and how those costs are shared across the population. Our current system funnels a sizable portion of healthcare dollars to pay the overhead costs of insurance companies and providers, and it places an outsized burden on Americans with lower incomes and greater medical need.”

“The Sanders approach to financing M4A bears many similarities in terms of the kitchen table budget. Families would save on insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs; in exchange, they would pay a 4% income-based premium for M4A. Because private insurance is financed regressively, this change is likely to produce savings for middle-class and low-income families, while high-income families would likely pay more... ”

“For most Americans, what really matters is the “kitchen table” budget: how much does your family spend on healthcare each month, and how much is left over for other priorities? A focus on the kitchen table budget—rather than the government budget or overall national health spending—highlights how M4A would impact the finances of individuals and families.”

“In essence, employers would spend about the same under the Warren Medicare for All plan as they would spend in the status quo, and federal and state governments would shift their current healthcare spending into M4A. But nearly $11 trillion in healthcare costs would be shifted from American families onto large corporations and the wealthy.”