Achieving Universal Healthcare Without Increasing Taxes or Incurring a Deficit

The debate over universal healthcare reforms has been a contentious discussion in the United States. Many argue that without increasing taxes or incurring a significant deficit, achieving true universal coverage is unfeasible. However, this article explores the possibility of implementing universal healthcare under the current financial constraints, and examines the role of regulation and tort law in achieving this goal.

The Current Healthcare Landscape

Currently, the healthcare system in the United States is privately governed, with a focus on profit over people. This has led to high healthcare costs and disparities in healthcare access. The difficulty in achieving universal coverage lies in the complex interplay between private providers, government policies, and public opinion. The Republican party has historically resisted universal healthcare, often citing the need for higher taxes or increased government spending as a deterrent.

Regulation and Tort Law Reform

One potential pathway to achieve universal healthcare without increasing taxes is through regulatory reform. Specifically, altering the tort laws that currently make it financially perilous for healthcare providers to practice medicine could significantly reduce healthcare costs. By eliminating the risk of frivolous lawsuits, it would be possible to cut approximately 20% of medical costs in the United States. This would be a substantial reduction and move towards making healthcare more accessible.

In the UK, for example, some routine procedures that are available in the US are denied due to the lack of financial incentives. In England, while a routine colonoscopy may be performed, the anesthesia is not covered. As a result, many people forgo these procedures, leading to lower cancer survival rates compared to the US. Implementing similar policies could help lower costs in the United States, although it may also limit access to certain treatments.

The Role of Medicare for All (M4A)

Some propose the Medicare for All (M4A) plan as a solution to implement universal healthcare. However, this plan is not without its challenges. According to Bernie Sanders, the M4A plan would cost approximately $10,000 per person per year. This is significantly higher than the current costs of private health insurance, including premiums, employer contributions, deductibles, and copays. For a family of four, M4A would cost about $40,000 annually.

Many Americans are skeptical of these higher costs, especially given the current financial strain. The question then arises: is the cost of universal healthcare justified by the savings from reduced private insurance and care? While it is possible that the savings would outweigh the costs, the current projections do not definitively answer this question.

Defense Spending and Financial Constraints

Another oft-cited solution is cutting defense spending. However, reducing defense spending has historically rebounded as higher military expenditures are required for national security and other defense-related needs. Therefore, relying on this method as a consistent solution is not feasible. The only viable option appears to be increasing taxes, albeit with a focus on equitable distribution.

Equitable Taxation and Universal Healthcare

The argument that the rich will pay for universal healthcare is flawed. In countries like Denmark, taxes on items such as cars and gasoline are significant, and VAT taxes are also applied. These are not unique to the wealthy; taxes from all citizens fund social programs, including healthcare. In the UK, gasoline is taxed at a rate of 8 pence per liter, with VAT and income taxes contributing to healthcare funding. The misconception that the wealthy alone are responsible for funding healthcare needs to be debunked.

For universal healthcare to be achieved, a comprehensive tax increase is unavoidable. The current spending on private health insurance and out-of-pocket expenses would need to be offset by higher taxes. For instance, the poorest working individuals would see a reduction in their take-home pay, with a minimum increase of 12% on top of their existing taxes. Even minimum wage workers would experience a significant reduction, losing about 1800 dollars annually out of their $15,000 salary.

Understanding and addressing the realities of universal healthcare funding is crucial. It requires a shift in perspective and a willingness to implement systemic changes. Only then can the United States move toward the goal of universal health coverage without increasing the burden on the already strained economy.

Conclusion

While it is challenging to achieve universal healthcare without increasing taxes or incurring a deficit, there are potential pathways to explore. Regulatory reform, equitable taxation, and a shift in public perception are essential steps in this journey. Whether through Medicare for All or other approaches, the key lies in a comprehensive and balanced strategy that ensures healthcare access for all without breaking the bank.