Bernie Sanders and Democrats have defended their push for "Medicare for All" in recent days by using a study written by Charles Blahous that they say concludes that the reform would save $2 trillion in healthcare costs.
But the study's author said that the advocates are wrong in saying that the study found that healthcare spending would go down if Medicare for All was enacted. Blahous, told the Washington Examiner, "The study absolutely did not say that. It says the opposite." "My study was clear that actual costs would be higher," Blahous said.
Blahous found that Medicare for All would cost $32.6 trillion over the next decade. The Urban Institute, a highly respected liberal think tank, estimated the total cost of the Sanders proposal at $32 trillion over 10 years.
The Sanders bill would create a national health insurance program; prohibit all Americans from having a private or employer-based health insurance plan; and abolish Medicare and Medicaid, absorbing their functions into the new national health insurance scheme.
Blahous says that the costs would be such that doubling all federal individual and corporate income taxes going forward would be insufficient to fully finance the plan.
Sander's bill is co-sponsored by a growing list of 16 leading Senate Democrats, and by 123 House Democrats.
Vote for Republicans in November. Democrats are on board for Medicare for All. The promise of "something for nothing" is always appealing, but it's never cheap. Socialism is expensive.