While campaigning in Detroit a few days ago, former President Barack Obama might have inadvertently slipped and spilled a long-held secret: The Affordable Care Act was a Trojan horse for single-payer health care.
U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El Sayed “will finish the job we started with the Affordable Care Act and guarantee quality, affordable healthcare to every single American!” Obama exclaimed.
So, Obama sought to put the nation onto a path to single-payer health care when he signed the Affordable Care Act into law after all!
However, Obama knew that the United States was not ready for a single-payer system when the Affordable Care Act was being crafted.
So, under the strategy of incrementalism, Obamacare was rolled out.
It must be noted that President Obama promised that Obamacare would bend the health care cost curve down. He specifically said deductibles and premiums would decrease under the law.
None of that occurred. Health care is more expensive than ever. This year, monthly premiums on the Affordable Care Act Marketplace are up nearly 60 percent, on average.
Nevertheless, the abysmal performance of Obamacare is not causing people like Obama to humble themselves and ponder that maybe they don’t know how to micromanage the health care sector.
Wrong.
The new strategy is endless empathy.
“Wanting everybody to have health care, how is that radical?” Obama asked. “Abdul shares my values of wanting everybody to get healthcare.”
I want everybody to have health care. I think almost everybody wants everybody else to have health care.
But wanting something cannot manifest it into existence. The real question should be whether the government can deliver high-quality health care to everybody for “free.”
Based on history, the verdict is a resounding no. The Soviet Union could not do it. Canada cannot do it. The United Kingdom cannot do it. And neither can the United States.
This is why I get incensed when people like Obama, who absolutely know that single payer does not mean unlimited access to health care, mislead voters into believing that Medicare for All is a viable solution to their health care cost woes.
First, Obama well knows that Medicare does not offer comprehensive coverage for “free.” Second, he surely knows that Medicare is already on the brink of insolvency and that offering Medicare to all Americans would be the nail in the coffin for a program intended to help senior citizens.
I wish Obama was more transparent and honest and described single payer as Medicaid for All because that would be a much more apt comparison.
Medicaid is government-run health care, which means Medicaid comes with strings attached. Namely, you can only go to providers covered by Medicaid.
Empowering the federal government to become the sole payer means that the federal government determines who gets access to what and when.
The federal government is already $40 trillion in debt with $2-trillion annual deficits for years to come. The money to pay for universal health care, which is not “free,” does not exist.
President Obama knows this, but like he did during the debate and discourse about Obamacre, he is not telling the whole truth.
Chris Talgo is the Editorial Director for The Heartland Institute and a fellow for Heartland’s Glenn C. Haskins Emerging Issues Center.
