Would the United States Pass Universal Medicare Without Objection from Insurance Companies?

When considering the critical issue of universal healthcare, one notable exception in the United States is the predominant reliance on private insurance. However, as the nation progresses into the 21st century, the necessity for universal healthcare and a robust police force emerges as fundamental requirements. Past discrepancies, such as the need for obsessive (yet futile) self-protection from fellow citizens, are relegated to history. Among the myriad reasons for resistance, greed and ignorance stand out as the most detrimental.

Why Private Insurers Hinder Universal Healthcare

The crux of the issue lies in the operational structure of the current healthcare system. To illustrate, it is logically impossible for the United States to achieve universal healthcare while maintaining the presence of private insurers. This is because the insurance model inherently prioritizes profit. By nature, private insurance companies are driven by the need to generate at least a minimal profit margin. Consequently, they achieve this often through limiting access to healthcare services. Approximately one-third of the US healthcare budget is allocated to administrative costs. These administrative expenses primarily serve to support those whose chief contribution is to engage in disputing medical professionals and, in some cases, succeeding in these arguments. The ensuing inefficiencies and costs highlight a stark ineffectiveness in the current system.

Transitioning to Universal Medicare

The transition to universal Medicare, if it were to occur, would be a gradual process. It would not happen overnight but would require a multi-year transition period. During this time, it would be imperative to allow the insurance companies to adjust to the new landscape. Regrettably, as changes are implemented, the industry will resist vehemently. The reason for this resistance is rooted in the companies' existing comfort with the status quo, which they are seeking to preserve.

Insurance Companies' "Last Man Standing" Approach

Insurers are known to adopt a "last man standing" philosophy in the event of a shift toward universal healthcare. This strategy posits that a small number of companies may remain operational, possibly consolidating into a single entity. The success of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) provides a relevant example. This legislation inadvertently aided the biggest 20 percent of insurers by driving smaller competitors out of business. This consolidation was a significant factor in the industry landscape but is seldom discussed in public discourse.

Implications for Remaining Insurers

Given the current state of the industry, most of the remaining companies are unlikely to vehemently oppose the transition. Their political interests may not align with opposing benefits to the general public. However, some insurers may thrive while others may face significant challenges. These smaller companies would likely have to shutter their operations, lay off employees, and cease their business pursuits. Such a transition would require a delicate balance to ensure the smooth passage of healthcare reform while mitigating the negative impacts on the workforce and the insurance industry as a whole.