Accordingly, given that voters’ highest priority health care issue is addressing the cost of health insurance coverage, the American people seem to have delivered a resounding rejection of any possible Medicare-for-All or Medicare “public option” that is the anchor policy prescription in “Bidencare.”
Indeed, senior citizens, who have the most experience with government-run health insurance coverage, is the group most opposed to that approach.
Simply put, voters are just not on board with heavy-handed government intervention in health care. By overwhelming margins, voters support a systematic approach that addresses the specific drivers of health care costs in lieu of a one-size-fits-all, top-down policy prescription.
It’s also worth noting that in our current hyper-partisan environment, that holds true across the parties.
In recent years, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have offered proposals attempting to limit the coverage individuals can receive, what medicines are covered and what treatments are deemed affordable enough—all decisions government bureaucrats would make for you, not your health care provider.
But one need only look to Europe to see how such policies have fared. In a word: terribly. Those policies ultimately mean reduced access to new cancer treatments, long waits to see specialists, denial of coverage and other myriad unintended consequences.