Comment: Covid is refuting the case for Medicare for All

Medicare didn’t improve outcomes for seniors during the pandemic; it won’t for the rest of us.

By Sally Pipes / For The Herald

Medicare for All just won’t die. More than 100 House Democrats have signed onto new legislation that, if passed, would outlaw all private insurance and put all Americans on a federally run insurance plan within two years.

The bill’s chief sponsor, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., says Medicare for All is the “solution” to the covid-19 crisis and will improve access to quality care in the long run. Health care is a human right, she says.

She could hardly be more wrong. A complete government takeover of the U.S. health insurance system would deprive Americans of the private coverage the vast majority of them like; and force them to endure long waits for subpar care in exchange.

Jayapal believes the disparate impact of covid-19 on low-income Americans — many of whom lack comprehensive coverage and are in poor health — is proof of the need for Medicare for All.

Low-income people have indeed suffered disproportionately amid the pandemic. It would seem intuitive that a guarantee of government health coverage would help them. But look at the outcomes posted by patients on Medicaid, the government health insurance program for the poor. Nationwide, Medicaid covers more than 70 million people.

In 2008, Oregon expanded its Medicaid program by lottery. About 6,000 people received coverage through the program and a little fewer than 6,000 people did not receive coverage. It was a natural experiment that allowed researchers to evaluate the impact of Medicaid on a person’s health.

They found that Medicaid “generated no significant improvements in measured physical health outcomes” for the program’s beneficiaries, compared to those with no insurance at all.

Another population hit hard by covid-19 is seniors. They’re also already covered by public insurance, in the form of Medicare. The fact that they had government coverage had little bearing on their susceptibility to the virus.

The transition to a single-payer system would most directly impact the majority of Americans with private insurance; a group that, by and large, is happy with the health insurance status quo. According to a recent Gallup poll, 63 percent of these Americans are generally satisfied with their health coverage. That figure actually increased last year during the pandemic.

Medicare for All’s champions are fond of pointing out that a majority, albeit a slight one, of Americans supports the idea and has for several years, according to polling from the Kaiser Family Foundation. But they change their minds once they learn more about it. Just 13 percent support Medicare for All if it means abolishing private insurance, according to a Hill-HarrisX survey.

The public is right to be skeptical of a government takeover of health insurance. Single-payer health care has yielded tragic results everywhere it’s been tried.

In the United Kingdom’s government-run, universal coverage system, life-threatening wait times and rationing of care were routine even before covid-19. They got significantly worse during the pandemic.

In my native Canada, patients seeking specialty treatment face a median wait of nearly 23 weeks for care from a specialist after a referral from their general practitioner. Early in the pandemic, Canadian hospitals had to postpone more than 350,000 surgeries, procedures and consultations. It’ll take months — and cost more than $1 billion — to clear that backlog.

Such waits and rationing are bad enough. But Jayapal and company envision spending north of $3 trillion a year on Medicare for All. That’s not much less than the government takes in taxes each year; in total. Even if the federal government were to double what it takes in individual and corporate income taxes, it would still be short what it needs to pay for Medicare for All.

Supporters of the House’s new Medicare for All bill insist that vovid-19 has added urgency to their cause. In reality, the pandemic has left our country less willing — and far less able — to endure the hardship that inevitably accompanies single-payer.

Sally C. Pipes is president, CEO, and the Thomas W. Smith fellow in health care policy at the Pacific Research Institute. Her latest book is “False Premise, False Promise: The Disastrous Reality of Medicare for All,” (Encounter 2020). Follow her on Twitter @sallypipes.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Wednesday, May 8

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) speaks to reporters during a press conference about the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act, on Capitol Hill in Washington, on Wednesday, May 1, 2024. Senate Democrats reintroduced broad legislation on Wednesday to legalize cannabis on the federal level, a major shift in policy that has wide public support, but which is unlikely to be enacted this year ahead of November’s elections and in a divided government. (Valerie Plesch/The New York Times)
Editorial: Federal moves on cannabis encouraging, if incomplete

The Biden administration and the Senate offer sensible proposals to better address marijuana use.

Tom Burke: Don’t know much about history? Better start reading

Reading — anything — matters, but especially before an election with history-making consequences.

Where did Carolyn Hax advice column go?

Recently the Herald has replaced the Carolyn Hax column with Dear Abby.… Continue reading

Why did The Herald add an astrology column in print?

We live in times when accurate information and good science are vital.… Continue reading

Plastics are vital to health care

Regarding a recent letter warning about plastic pollution: For the past six… Continue reading

Climate change, nuclear war threat to life on earth

There is one sentinel topic that has received minimal media attention in… Continue reading

toon
Editorial cartoons for Tuesday, May 7

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

A radiation warning sign along the road near the Hanford Site in Washington state, on Aug. 10, 2022. Hanford, the largest and most contaminated of all American nuclear weapons production sites, is too polluted to ever be returned to public use. Cleanup efforts are now at an inflection point.  (Mason Trinca/The New York Times)
Editorial: Latest Hanford cleanup plan must be scrutinized

A new plan for treating radioactive wastes offers a quicker path, but some groups have questions.

Maureen Dowd: Consider the three faces of Donald Trump

Past, present and future are visibile in his countenance; an especially grim one on the cover of Time.

Paul Krugman: Still no stag and not much flation

The grumbling about inflation’s slow path to 2 percent isn’t worth steps that risk a recession.

David Brooks: Why past is prologue and protests help Trump

Today’s crowd-sourced protests muddle their message and goals and alienate the quiet disapprovers.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.