Call/text: (617) 682-9697 | e: [email protected] | f: 617-391-3067
Resolved: The United States federal government should enact the Medicare-For-All Act of 2019 (Bibliography)

Resolved: The United States federal government should enact the Medicare-For-All Act of 2019 (Bibliography)

Keywords

Medicare for All
Sanders Plan

Background

The Bill

This bill establishes a national health insurance program that is administered by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Among other requirements, the program must (1) cover all U.S. residents; (2) provide for automatic enrollment of individuals upon birth or residency in the United States; and (3) cover items and services that are medically necessary or appropriate to maintain health or to diagnose, treat, or rehabilitate a health condition, including hospital services, prescription drugs, mental health and substance abuse treatment, dental and vision services, and long-term care.

The bill prohibits cost-sharing (e.g., deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments) and other charges for covered services. Additionally, private health insurers and employers may only offer coverage that is supplemental to, and not duplicative of, benefits provided under the program.

Health insurance exchanges and specified federal health programs terminate upon program implementation. However, the program does not affect coverage provided through the Department of Veterans Affairs or the Indian Health Service.

The bill also establishes a series of implementing provisions relating to (1) health care provider participation; (2) HHS administration; and (3) payments and costs, including the requirement that HHS negotiate prices for prescription drugs.

Individuals who are age 18 or younger, age 55 or older, or already enrolled in Medicare may enroll in the program starting one year after enactment of this bill; other individuals may buy into the program at this time. The program must be fully implemented two years after enactment.

Sanders’ Medicare for All Plan Explained 

Bill Summary from Bernie Sanders 

There’s a new Medicare for All Bill in the House

Compare Medicare for All and Public Plan proposals 

What is Medicare?

The Origins and Demise of the Public Option 

General Websites

Health Affairs Blog

Kaiser Health News

General Articles

The Pros and Cons of Single Payer Health Care Plans

Is Health Care a Right?

Pro

General

Millions of Americans at-risk as Unemployment Soars 

Envisioning a better Health care system for all: The cost of care

The Case for an Improved Medicare for All Act 

The Case for Medicare for All (book)

Medicare for All: Leaving No One Behind 

The transformative potential of Medicare for All. “Medicare-for-All” should be more than a badge of political identity or opposition. This Article examines the concept’s potential to catalyze policy innovation in the U.S. health care system. After suggesting that the half century of existing Medicare has been as much “Gilded Age” as “Golden Age,” the Article arrays the operational possibilities for a Medicare-for-All initiative. It revisits America’s recent history of pragmatic rather than principled health policy, and identifies professional and political barriers to more sweeping reform. It focuses on four aspects of health policy that have become apparent: simultaneous inefficiency and injustice in medical care, neglect of the social determinants of health, inertia resulting from the legal architecture of health care, and the latent power of generational change. It concludes by explaining how a Medicare-for-All frame might prompt ethical re-engagement by the medical profession and help the health care system take specific steps on a path to improvement.

Economic analysis of Medicare for All  This study provides an economic analysis of the Medicare for All Act of 2017, which was introduced before the United States Senate by Senator Bernie Sanders (S. 1804). Our analysis also addresses, more broadly, a range of issues that need to be examined seriously in considering any specific proposals for a single-payer health care system for the United States. The most fundamental goals of Medicare for All are to significantly improve health care outcomes for U.S. residents while also establishing effective cost controls throughout the health care system. We conclude that these two purposes are both achievable.

Envisioning a Better US Health Care System for All 

Health Insurance Reform in the US: What, How, and Why

The Sanders Single Payer Health Plan

Death

Being Uninsured is Deadly 

COVID-19

Canada’s Coronavirus Response Shows Why We Need Medicare for All to Fight This Pandemic 

Scientists Expect More Pandemics in the Age of COVID-19 

Status Quo Costs

Short-Term Health Plans Leave Consumers on the Hook for Big Costs

Health Care Spending in the United States and Other High Income Countries

Even the Insured Sometimes Can’t Afford Their Medical Bills 

American’s challenges with health care costs

Economy

Consequences of a lack of health insurance on health and earnings

Cost Answers

Single Payer is Actually a Bargain 

Single Payer System Likely to Save Money 

Estimating the Costs of a A Single Payer System in New York 

Drug Prices

How to Stop Immoral Drug Price Increases

The High Costs or Prescription Drug Prices in the United States 

Hospitals

Medicare for All would Improve Hospital Financing

Race

Single-Payer Health Reform: A Step Toward Reducing Structural Racism in Health Care

Black-White Differences in Infectious Disease and Morality in the US 

Officials Seek To Shift Resources Away From Policing To Address Black ‘Public Health Crisis’

Black cancer patients miss out on promising drugs 

Human genomics has a diversity problem

Universal Insurance and an Equal Access Healthcare System Eliminate Disparities for Black Patients After Traumatic Injury

Medicare for All is a Racial Equality Policy

Black lives matter: Differential mortality and the racial composition of the U.S. electorate, 1970–2004

Bioterrorism

Bioterrorism and health care reform

COVID

Racial disparities in COVID-19 and the need for Medicare for All 

Canada’s Coronavirus Response Shows Why We Need Medicare for All to Fight This Pandemic 

Antibiotics

Antiobiotic resistance is a slow motion pandemic

Con

How Medicare for All Will Wreck America’s Health Care System  (b00k)

Disastrous Reality of Medicare for all (book)

National Health Spending Estimates Under Medicaid for All  We estimate that total health expenditures under a Medicare for All plan that provides comprehensive coverage and long-term care benefits would be $3.89 trillion in 2019 (assuming such a plan was in place for all of the year), or a 1.8 percent increase relative to expenditures under current law. This estimate accounts for a variety of factors including increased demand for health services, changes in payment and prices, and lower administrative costs. We also include a supply constraint that results in unmet demand equal to 50 percent of the new demand. If there were no supply constraint, we estimate that total health expenditures would increase by 9.8 percent to $4.20 trillion.

While the 1.8 percent increase is a relatively small change in national spending, the federal government’s health care spending would increase substantially, rising from $1.09 trillion to $3.50 trillion, an increase of 221 percent.

The Sanders Single-Payer Health Care Plan. Our central findings of the effects of the Sanders approach are shown in table 1 and include the following:

 All American residents would be automatically enrolled in acute care coverage, increasing insurance coverage by an estimated 28.3 million people in 2017, from an uninsurance rate for nonelderly adults of 10.4 percent under current law in 2017. In 2026, the Sanders plan would decrease the number of nonelderly uninsured by 30.9 million, or 11.0 percent of the population, relative to current law. (The uninsurance rate under current law in 2026 is projected to be larger than the rate in 2017 as a result of demographic changes and a slight decrease in the rate of employer-sponsored insurance.) Although the intent is unspecified in the campaign’s materials, this finding assumes that the plan would cover the undocumented population as well as citizens and other legal residents.

 National health expenditures for acute care for the nonelderly would increase by $412.0 billion (22.9 percent) in 2017. Aggregate spending on acute care services for those otherwise enrolled in Medicare would increase by $38.5 billion (3.8 percent) in 2017. Long-term service and support expenditures would increase by $68.4 billion (28.6 percent) in 2017.  Together, national health expenditures would increase by a total of $518.9 billion (16.9 percent) in 2017, and by 6.6 trillion (16.6 percent) between 2017 and 2026.

 The increase in federal expenditures would be considerably larger than the increase in national health expenditures because substantial spending borne by states, employers, and households under current law would shift to the federal government under the Sanders plan. Federal expenditures in 2017 would increase by $1.9 trillion for acute care for the nonelderly, by $465.9 billion for those otherwise enrolled in Medicare, and by $212.1 billion for long-term services and supports.

 In total, federal spending would increase by about $2.5 trillion (257.6 percent) in 2017. Federal expenditures would increase by about $32.0 trillion (232.7 percent) between 2017 and 2026. The increase in federal spending is so large because the federal government would absorb a substantial amount of current spending by state and local governments, employers, and households. In addition, federal spending would be needed for newly covered individuals, expanded benefits and the elimination of cost sharing for those insured under current law, and the new long-term support and services program.

Analysis of Sanders’ Single Payer Plan 

Medicare for All Would Make Looming Doctor Shortages Worse

Alternatives/Market Better

Reforming American’s Health Care System Through Choice and Competition 

Chris Jacobs, “Democrats’ New Single Payer Bill Will Destroy Everything Good about Your Health Care,” Federalist, March 1, 2019, h.

Medicare for All Doesn’t Save Lives

Roy A. Beveridge, et al., “Mortality Differences Between Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage,” Inquiry, June 2017, .

12 John Z. Ayanian, “Medicare Beneficiaries More Likely to Receive Appropriate Ambulatory Services in HMOs than in Traditional Medicare,” Health Affairs, July 2013,.

Costs

Charles Blahous, “The Costs of a National Single Payer Health Care System,” Mercatus Center, July 30, 2018,

Chris Jacobs, “The CBO Report on Single Payer Isn’t the One We Deserve to See,” The Federalist May 3, 2019,

John Holahan and Linda Blumberg, “Estimating the Cost of a Single Payer Plan” Urban Institute, October 9, 2018,

Jodi Liu and Christine Eibner, “National Health Spending Estimates Under Medicare for All,” Rand Corporation, April 2019, https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3106.html.

Josh Katz, Kevin Quealy, and Margot Sanger-Katz, “Would ‘Medicare for All’ Save Billions or Cost Billions?” New York Times, April 10, 2019,

Can Taxing the Rich Pay for Sanders Medicare for All Plan?

Tax Hikes on the Wealthy Alone Can’t Pay for ‘Medicare for All’

Sanders’ Single Payer is Almost Twice as Expensive as He Says 

The Extremely Bad Economics of Medicare for All 

Cost Savings Answers

Sanders says Medicare for All Would Reduce Health Care Spending. Would it?

Choices for Financing Medicare for All 

Sanders’ Single Payer is Almost Twice as Expensive as He Says 

Economy

Choices for Financing Medicare for All 

Collapse of Private Insurance

“Kamala Harris Reveals That Medicare for All Involves Ending All Private Insurance,” The Federalist, January 31, 2019

Medicare for All Would Abolish Private Insurance 

General Solvency Answers

Medicare for None

Why Vermont’s single-payer effort failed and what Democrats can learn from it

Why Bernie Sanders Plan Won’t Get us More Health Care 

Medicare Advantage Good/Better to Keep it than replace with Medicare for All

Enhancing Medicare Advantage 

Mortality Differences Between Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage 

A dozen facts about Medicare Advantage

Rationing

Sanders Admits His Plan Would Ration Care

Health Care Stocks

Health Care Stock Route Amidst Political Pressure

Hospital Collapse

Hospitals Stand to Lose Billions Under Medicare for All 

The Implications for Medicare for All for US Hospitals 

Surveillance Bad

How Electronic Records Became an Absolute Fiasco

Death by a Thousand Clicks: Where Electronic Health Records Went Wrong

Wait Times

Waiting Your Turn: Wait Times for Health Care in Canada 

Private Costs of Public Cues for Medically Necessary Care

Hospital Collapse

Hospitals Stand to Lose Billions Under Medicare for All 

The Implications for Medicare for All for US Hospitals 

Doctor Shortages

Medicare for All Would Make Looming Doctor Shortages Worse