Excerpt: 'Proposals for U.S. single-payer reform have a long history'
The Virtues and Vices of Single-Payer Health Care
Jonathan Oberlander, Ph.D.
N Engl J Med 2016
Excerpt:
Proposals for U.S. single-payer reform have a long history. A 1943 bill subsequently endorsed by President Harry Truman in 1945 envisioned national health insurance funded through payroll taxes. That bill and subsequent efforts by the Truman administration to pass universal insurance went nowhere. However, Medicare, conceived in the 1950s and enacted in 1965, embodied the single-payer model. Medicares architects saw it as the cornerstone of a national health insurance system. They believed that Medicare would eventually expand with children perhaps the next group to join the program to cover the entire population. That aspiration was never realized. Meanwhile, Congress created Medicaid as a separate program for some categories of low-income Americans, including families with dependent children, further fragmenting the insurance pool.
Single payer enjoyed strong support during the early 1970s among liberal Democrats such as Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA), yet it never came close to passing. Subsequently, its political fortunes faded. Democratic policymakers increasingly pursued incrementalism (primarily through Medicaid expansion) and more conservative models that relied on private insurance (managed competition) as the only feasible reform routes. Medicare itself underwent a transformation as the role of private insurers in the program grew substantially. The 2010 ACA represented both a landmark achievement in expanding access to insurance and the culmination of a turn away from single payer. In 2009, the House of Representatives did pass legislation creating a Medicare-like government insurance program that would be available to the uninsured in competition with private plans. But this public option couldnt clear the Senate. Even with a Democratic president and large Democratic congressional majorities, a narrow remnant of single payer failed to pass.
Nevertheless, the single-payer approach enjoys a dedicated following among groups such as Physicians for a National Health Program, and Sanderss embrace has generated renewed attention for the idea. Regardless of the outcome of the 2016 election, the single-payer debate will persist. The enduring appeal of Medicare for All is understandable, given the fragmented, inequitable, costly, profit-driven, and wasteful nonsystem that prevails in the United States. The ACAs shortcomings are sufficiently serious, single-payer adherents argue, that Obamacare has left unsolved many of U.S. medicines major problems. For all the ACAs considerable achievements, health insurance and medical care are still unaffordable for many people. In a country where nearly 30 million persons remain uninsured, where health insurance is increasingly thinned out by rising deductibles and cost sharing, where even insured patients face staggering bills and the prospect of medical bankruptcy, where myriad insurers and payment systems generate astonishing complexity, and where more money is spent on administration than on heart disease and cancer, its no surprise to hear calls for sweeping change.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1602009#t=article
BigmanPigman
(51,593 posts)dalton99a
(81,510 posts)BigmanPigman
(51,593 posts)area51
(11,909 posts)Donkees
(31,407 posts)Excerpt:
In 1946, the Republicans took control of Congress and had no interest in enacting national health insurance. They charged that it was part of a large socialist scheme. Truman responded by focusing even more attention on a national health bill in the 1948 election. After Trumans surprise victory in 1948, the AMA thought Armageddon had come. They assessed their members an extra $25 each to resist national health insurance, and in 1945 they spent $1.5 million on lobbying efforts which at the time was the most expensive lobbying effort in American history. They had one pamphlet that said, Would socialized medicine lead to socialization of other phases of life? Lenin thought so. He declared socialized medicine is the keystone to the arch of the socialist state. The AMA and its supporters were again very successful in linking socialism with national health insurance, and as anti-Communist sentiment rose in the late 1940s and the Korean War began, national health insurance became vanishingly improbable. Trumans plan died in a congressional committee.
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/a-brief-history-universal-health-care-efforts-in-the-us