WHAT THEY ARE SAYING: Americans Urge Elected Officials To Build On What Is Working, Reject One-Size-Fits-All Health Care
WASHINGTON – After the higher taxes and harmful consequences of new government-controlled health insurance systems were highlighted for Americans at last week’s presidential debate, voices throughout the nation are encouraging elected officials to oppose a one-size-fits-all system that will force Americans to pay more to wait longer for worse care.
… If Democratic presidential candidates want a shot at capturing the support – let alone votes – of working families here in Nevada and across the country, they should present realistic plans that would actually address the two biggest concerns folks have when it comes to health care: lowering costs and expanding coverage. Unfortunately, a government-run health insurance system will fail on both counts while also taking away the hard-earned coverage so many in organized labor have struggled to secure.
… Private and employer-sponsored plans would struggle to compete and eventually, one by one, these carefully curated and individualized plans would begin to disappear until only the government’s one-size-fits-all plan remained … Rather than addressing the concerns most workers and employees have, they would only leave Americans paying more to accessuneven and potentially inferior coverage and care — while incurring longer waiting times.
… The fact of the matter is, whether it is “Medicare for All,” a public option or single payer, any of these massive, top-down proposals will inevitably result in higher taxes on Americans … With a price tag of more than $30 trillion in the first decade, there is simply no way for Americans to avoid getting hit with massive tax increases … Rather than throwing all that progress away and gambling it all on an uncertain future, Democratic presidential candidates and other national leaders should come up with some practical solutions for strengthening health care in America. Ultimately, finding ways to improve upon the successes we have seen under the ACA, while continuing to address the areas that still need improvement, is a far better approach than fundamentally overhauling our entire health care system.
… When quality of care or access to care are threatened, so too are the affordable plans and unique solutions we help create for Iowans every single day. Remember this the next time you hear the terms public option, “Medicare for All,” or a single-payer system: There is nothing in a one-size-fits-all proposal that properly addresses cost and access issues. Instead, these issues will be exacerbated if we decide to scrap our health care system.
… A recent study noted that under a public option, Iowa’s rural hospitals could lose $476 million, putting as many as 52 hospitals at a “high risk of closure.” Understanding this picture should make us rethink these proposals. Importantly, it should also renew our commitment to addressing the root causes of our rising costs, rather than focusing on what sounds the most appealing … We can improve healthcare for every Iowan by focusing on priorities over taglines.
A poll released by the NY Times recently showed that Independent voters are being turned off by some … positions that the Democratic presidential candidates have proposed. It’s not a surprise, especially when it comes to things that will change their lives like government-run healthcare. People like being able to pick the insurance that is right for them and to be able to see a doctor of their choosing at a time of their choosing. Healthcare run by our inefficient government would almost surely disrupt that.
… The fact is, government-run health care proposals like Medicare for all, a public option, or single payer would do anything to improve health care in America … There are far better, more effective ways to improve health care in America without jeopardizing the innovations that are made through private drug research and development. To bring costs down and increase coverage for more Americans, politicians and candidates running for president should focus on market-driven solutions – not on increasing government interference.
Ultimately, a government-run health care insurance system will mean fewer options, diminished access, and longer wait times for patients; higher taxes for all Americans; and, from a pharmaceutical perspective, fewer incentives for drug researchers, manufacturers, and developers to discover innovative, new approaches to health care. When it comes to improving health care, it’s time for a new prescription – and Medicare for All isn’t it.
While it may not get the headlines … there was great news released that said the Affordable Care Act (ACA) premiums are falling in cost and the number of insurers is increasing. This is a tremendous development, especially considering that most of the Democratic nominees for President think it is wise to scrap the entire system and start anew with a government system like Medicare for All or the public option. This seems like it is jumping the gun and a tad premature, especially given that the Affordable Care Act is finding its way.