WHAT THEY ARE SAYING: Americans Urge Elected Officials To Build On What Is Working, Reject One-Size-Fits-All Health Care
WASHINGTON – After last week’s U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee hearing highlighted the unaffordable costs and negative consequences of new government-controlled health insurance systems, voters throughout the nation are encouraging elected officials to oppose a one-size-fits-all system that will force American families to pay more to wait longer for worse care.
… Even if we overlook the upheaval of forcing 180 million Americans on private health insurance into a government plan, the taxes required to finance it would be unaffordable. Medicare for All has been estimated to cost at least $30 trillion over 10 years. Citizens don’t believe a cost that exorbitant can be covered by taxing only the rich, as some proponents suggest. Experts at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a group that addresses federal fiscal issues, recently concluded that, “tax increases on high earners, corporations, and the financial sector by themselves could not possibly cover more than one-third the cost of Medicare for All.” The rest – two-thirds of that $30 trillion price tag, $20 trillion, would come from middle class, working Americans and that would be unacceptable.
… Variations like a Medicare buy-in or a public option come with big price tags and may cause significant health and economic upheaval … Congress should protect and improve the current system.
… The Medicare for All plans … would use Medicare payment rates for hospitals and doctors, which are much lower than what private insurers pay for healthcare services, particularly in Iowa. The result of their single-payer plan would mean large decreases in payment for both hospitals and doctors, enough of a decrease that many doctors could not continue to practice independently — since many services are paid by Medicare much less than it costs to perform them … [T]he Urban Institute has estimated that … Medicare for All proposals would cost an additional $32 trillionover the next 10 years. The cost of improving Obamacare to be able to cover everyone would be far less.
… A Navigant Research study in August of this year notes that a “public option could negatively impact access to and quality of care through rural hospitals’ potential elimination of services and reduction of clinical and administrative staff, as well as damage the economic foundation of the communities these hospitals serve.” The report indicates nearly one-in-three rural Colorado hospitals could be forced to close.