going have to back all the way to 1986 and EMTALA , the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act to reform healthcare. It’s why every credible answer to healthcare coverage included individual mandates from the Heritage plan that led to Romneycare and Obamacare to account for the ‘freerider’ effect.
Very few bills get vetoed when there is no super majority. Ask yourself why that is and then apply it to healthcare. With a supermajority in both houses, they could ram through Obamacare even with Trump as president.
Public system that allows for a strong private sector insurance market. It would be tough without it being uber expensive but it will work for a few generations until people completely start relying on the public system and the private system will be for the very few.
“Before the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2013, the uninsured rate was about 14.4%, while by 2023, the uninsured rate had fallen to a record low of around 7.9%, which is less than half of the pre-ACA rate. This is a significant increase in health insurance coverage, largely driven by the ACA’s provisions like Medicaid expansion and tax credits for private insurance.”
Oh, I misunderstood where you were coming from. I just started a job consulting with a major insurance/medicaid provider, and I would agree. Except not at a federal level. It would have to be done at the state level with each state managing its bucket of money…and as you know, Medicare is not free…you pay some of your expenses right? So while I have in the past been opposed…nationalized HC is notnthe way. It would collapse under the weight of 375 million people. But on the smaller state by state level…i would be for a Medicaid or Medicare for all option.