Different Takes: When Will Warren’s Pitch For ‘Medicare For All’ Get Explicit About Costs?; Expensive Lessons On The Many Failures Of Health Care
Editorial writers focus on policies impacting rising health care costs.
The New York Times:
It Was The Best Of Warren. It Was The Worst Of Warren
Pete Buttigieg went after Elizabeth Warren, wondering why she was so intent on abolishing private health insurance and suggesting that her stance would dangerously intensify political polarization in America. Amy Klobuchar went after Warren, describing her Medicare for All plan as one big fat Republican talking point and Warren as a fantasist peddling “a pipe dream.” Bernie Sanders went after her — well, sort of — by correctly noting her repeated refusal to admit what he already had, which is that Medicare for All would require a tax increase not just for affluent Americans but also for the middle class. (Frank Bruni, 10/16)
The Hill:
Promising Lower Health Care Costs Doesn't Fly With Women — Who Will Vote
Can you afford to buy a new economy car each year? And if you do not drive it, would you just junk it and buy another new one, repeating this cycle every year? Of course not, no matter how much money you have. But that is the equivalent of what we do each year on health care costs, according to a recent Kaiser Foundation report. The average premium for family coverage now tops $20,717 for those covered by a large employer. The average for high-deductible plans with savings options is $21,683. That premium for large firms was only $5,845 in 1999. And these costs do not include copays and deductibles. (Sarah Chamberlain, 10/14)
The New York Times:
This Is The Most Realistic Path To Medicare For All
Much to the dismay of single-payer advocates, our current health insurance system is likely to end with a whimper, not a bang. The average person simply prefers what we know versus the bureaucracy we fear. But for entirely practical reasons, we might yet end up with a form of Medicare for All. Private health insurance is failing in slow motion, and all signs are that it will continue. It was for similar reasons that we got Medicare in 1965. Private insurance, under the crushing weight of chronic conditions and technologic breakthroughs (especially genetics), will increasingly be a losing proposition. (J.B. Silvers, 10/15)
Boston Globe:
Drug Price Transparency: Round 2
Next week is expected to kick off yet another round in Massachusetts’ continuing battle to control health care costs, a prime driver of the state budget and family budgets alike. This time, health regulators are taking a hard look at drug costs — an overdue target for scrutiny if there ever was one — but already Big Pharma and the local biotech industry are pushing back. (10/16)
Nashville Tennessean:
Lower Health Care Costs Act Will Backfire In Rural Areas Of Tennessee
No one likes to receive a surprise bill for medical services that you assumed were covered by your health plan. Congress wants this to end, and there are several proposals on the table now that they’ll consider in the weeks ahead. (Byron F. Stephens II, 10/16)
