According to a 2023 Gallup Poll, “57% [of Americans] think the government should be responsible for ensuring [insurance] coverage for all Americans,” yet this objective remains unfulfilled. As the U.S. remains one of the only nations without universalized healthcare despite Americans’ approval, why does our government lack efforts to prioritize public health compared to other nations? Expanding healthcare access and coverage is a step the U.S. could take to promote social equity and improve Americans’ standard of living. Yet, we fail to adopt it due to a tirade of criticism and misunderstanding of government spending and policy socialization.
Our nation’s healthcare system lacks universal coverage because its foundation is a capitalist mindset – prioritizing profits over equality and human rights – when the latter should be the focus of our government. Our healthcare system should be about helping people who are sick, not only those who can afford it. When a healthcare system’s focal point is a profit-driven culture, altruism is diminished, and so is a person’s ability to receive healthcare. But if most of the public wants such a beneficial policy, why has no successful legislation existed? Our absence of direct democracy and misleading discourse of social spending on public health are to blame. If the U.S. adopted a universal healthcare model, it could mitigate our current system’s flaws and embody true democracy due to direct democracy and equitable policy made for all Americans by Americans, not through a group of biased politicians.
While much of the dialogue around a universal coverage system centers around high costs, time, and taxes, the broader economic benefits and long-term savings of universal health access outweigh the costs. A debate on universal healthcare from the National Institute of Health (NIH) finds that the significant “con” of universal healthcare would be costly, but through raising taxes on “high earners,” not the general public. The study's “pros” found that universal health care can address and mitigate the consequences of the growing chronic disease crisis, combat health disparities within socioeconomic status, and promote preventive health initiatives. Therefore, a recommendation to fund such a policy would be taxing the wealthiest Americans, which is the primary inhibitor to adopting universal healthcare. This simple solution is disregarded because it is seen as counterproductive for our current profit-driven nature; the wealthy’s stubbornness and selfishness exclude Americans from a robust and long-term investment in their future health.
An inherent aspect of our capitalist system fosters hesitation and reluctance when implementing universal healthcare. The Hill reports that “a majority of registered voters view the concept of universal health care as ‘largely’ socialist,” likely due to “critics of universal health care proposals slamm[ing] the idea, tying it to socialist ideals.” Biased politicians are misguiding voters who might benefit from universal healthcare by using socialism as a scare tactic. They are making Americans think their lives will be worse off because of taxes and our history of fighting communism when, in reality, people would have better health benefits and wouldn’t be taxed as much as they think. We see this example with our current political state and candidates; the Washington Post discusses how Trump and the GOP continue to theorize that “any increase in government redistribution would be tantamount to communism” in a Trump White House Report that compared U.S. congressmen who supported universal health care to communist dictators.
The incessant neoliberal view completely rules out the possibility when quite a few capitalist nations have universal healthcare, proving to the U.S. that being capitalist and providing universal healthcare are mutually exclusive. The U.S. can implement this policy for the general public's good, but it is more beneficial for its critics not to do so.
To implement this legislation, the U.S. should look to cross-national perspectives and case studies similar to our nation's. A PBS article explains how five capitalist democracies could provide universal healthcare. The most compelling case for the U.S. to follow is Switzerland, which shows “that universal coverage is possible, even in a highly capitalist nation with powerful insurance and pharmaceutical industries” and has considerably lower costs than the U.S. A reason for this successful long-term legislation is that it was “voted in by a national referendum in 1994” in a landslide; the citizens voted on the new law. Switzerland’s referendums are an exceptional example of direct democracy in which “the public can vote directly on constitutional initiatives and policy referenda – [which] is perceived positively by others worldwide, many of whom want their own country to emulate this model,” says Pew Research.
It asks why the U.S. does not allow direct democracy on prevalent issues despite branding ourselves as a beacon of “democracy.” Given Switzerland’s people-powered policy decision-making and ability to implement universal coverage while maintaining capitalist traits, it is a progressive step toward ensuring equitable-based policy and better representative democracy.
The U.S. should use a universal healthcare system because it would be a short-term cost for the wealthy and a long-term benefit for the general population. Contrary to popular belief, this system would also make the American healthcare system equitable and cost-efficient. As mentioned above, if most Americans would support universal healthcare, we must pivot toward a healthcare system focused on compassion over profits and direct democracy to represent Americans' specific preferences. The U.S. can provide universal healthcare while still being a capitalist economy, as a few countries have successfully done. However, this requires a shift from profit-driven policies to human rights-driven policies. Again, this comes down to understanding how the benefits of universal coverage outweigh the cost-burden con and implementing more direct democracy, as Switzerland does.
Bibliography
Brenan, Megan. “Majority in U.S. Still Say Gov’T Should Ensure Healthcare.” Gallup.Com, Gallup, 7 Feb. 2024, news.gallup.com/poll/468401/majority-say-gov-ensure-healthcare.aspx#:~:text=Since%20then%2C%20between%2051%25%20and,40%25%20say%20it%20should%20not.
“Five Capitalist Democracies & How They Do It | Sick Around The World | FRONTLINE.” PBS, 15 April 2008, https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/. Accessed 29 April 2024.
“Majority of Americans identify universal health care as 'largely socialist,' poll finds.” The Hill, 28 February 2019, https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/432072-majority-of-americans-see-universal-health-care-as-largely-socialist/. Accessed 29 April 2024.
O'Brien, Matt. “Perspective | Giving everyone health care doesn't make you a communist.” Washington Post, 25 October 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/10/25/giving-everyone-health-care-doesnt-make-you-communist/. Accessed 29 April 2024.
Silver, Laura, et al. “Views of electoral reform and direct democracy in 24 countries.” Pew Research Center, 13 March 2024, https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/03/13/electoral-reform-and-direct-democracy/. Accessed 30 April 2024.
Zieff G, Kerr ZY, Moore JB, Stoner L. Universal Healthcare in the United States of America: A Healthy Debate. Medicina (Kaunas). 2020 Oct 30;56(11):580. doi: 10.3390/medicina56110580. PMID: 33143030; PMCID: PMC7692272.
Comments