This is a short article. It is not intended to be a detailed analysis of the Medicare-for-All proposals being pushed by candidates for the Democratic nomination for President such as Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren.
This is, however, a quick analysis of estimated costs over a ten-year period and the sort of additional revenue needed to fund such an idea. Warren has been unwilling to address the “how-you-pay-for-it” aspect of this policy proposal. Supposedly, Senator Warren is coming out with a plan to pay for the costs in the very near future.
Estimates for the cost of implementing Medicare-for-all have been wide ranging and largely depend on who you ask. In a recent edition of The Atlantic, (October 16, 2019) they said the following on cost projections. “The Urban Institute, a center-left think tank highly respected among Democrats, is projecting that a plan similar to what Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders are pushing would require $34 trillion in additional federal spending over its first decade in operation.”
Frankly, the Urban Institutes cost estimate is on the higher side of most I have seen. The most common number I have seen for the cost of Medicare-for-all is 32.7 trillion dollars over a ten-year period. Again, the number estimates usually range from 30 trillion dollars to 34 trillion dollars, all over a ten-year period.
Using the 32.7 trillion-dollar figure for ten years, that averages to an additional cost to the US government annually of roughly 3.27 trillion dollars. You read that correctly … 3.27 trillion dollars.
When we look at the Federal tax revenue for the fiscal year that just ended, September 30, 2019, you see the Federal government took in 3.6 trillion dollars in total revenue (yes, we also spent about a trillion dollars more than we took in). 3.27 trillion dollars to cover the annual costs of Medicare-for-all is about what the Federal government collected in total revenue for the last year.
What is my point? In order to implement the Medicare-for-all proposal, the Federal government would have to almost double our current tax revenue collection. Keep in mind, 3.6 trillion dollars was not enough to even cover our current bills, as we overspent about one trillion dollars.
Senators Warren and Sanders have said the “rich will have to pay their fair share” under their administration and that will mostly cover the costs of the new Medicare plan. The truth is, if you taxed the so-called rich at 100% of their taxable income, the money would not come close to the funds needed.
Are Americans ready to see an almost doubling of their tax burden on the Federal side of the ledger? Think about it logically. 180 million Americans have private health insurance. Will they gladly forego their private insurance, a good deal of it paid for by their employers, to create a Medicare-for-all system?
I seriously doubt it. This simple analysis is just one of a multitude of issues that the Sanders-Warren-Biden-Harris-Booker-Yang-and-so-on and so on have gotten wrong.
We are in a time for choosing in America. Please, please, please – look this information up. I did a very rudimentary analysis on costs and revenue for this proposal; however, the numbers are easily available on Google and you can come to your own conclusion.
Medicare-for-all may sound like a good idea when you are on the campaign stump. When you are back in reality land however, it makes no sense whatsoever.
Ray Richardson is the host of the Ray Richardson Show on WLOB Radio. He has authored three books, written a newspaper column for over a decade and is a contributor to Richardson Magazine.
Ray lives with his wife of 34 years, Dee Dee, in Westbrook Maine. They have four grown children (8 when you count the spouses), and blessed with one granddaughter.
