There's no two ways about it, we can not defeat Donald Trump with double talk on health care - especially not about the impact and cost of a proposal to completely dismantle our health care system and eliminate employer-sponsored and all other private health insurance. Administrative costs for private insurers totaled 12% of premiums collected in 2017, but administrative costs under Medicare were just 2.3%, with Warren arguing a Medicare for all system would result in similar efficiency and cost savings. She pushed back Friday, unveiling a cost structure that she says would save American families $11 trillion in out-of-pocket expenses over the next decade.
Warren maintains that a single-payer, Medicare for all system could cover everyone in the USA and provide expanded benefits, including long-term care, for roughly what the country is now slated to spend on healthcare - about $52 trillion over the course of a decade.
Warren instead insisted that overall health care costs would increase for big corporations and the wealthy while falling for most everyone else.
Watch the 2020 Candidate Forum with Sen. She is near the top of the pack in opinion polls, having closed in on former Vice President Joe Biden, the early front-runner.
Fox News on Friday first published details of the Warren campaign's health care plan. The study claims, in order to raise the estimated $30 trillion over a decade that Warren and Bernie Sanders outlined in their original "Medicare for All" plan, it would require a 32 percent payroll tax, a 25 percent income surtax, or a 42 percent value-added tax.
The Siena College poll of likely Democratic caucus goers gives Warren a 3-point lead over Sanders, 22% to 19%, in Iowa and drops Biden to fourth place at 17%, behind South Bend (Ind.) Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who polled 18%. Further, Warren's campaign says if they are at risk of falling short of the revenue target, they could impose a "Supplemental Employer Medicare Contribution" for big companies with "extremely high executive compensation and stock buyback rates".
Warren advisers said the added levies would make America's overall tax burden - now one of the lowest among rich nations - into a merely average one. Such questions proved to be a point of weakness for the candidate in recent debates.
"Here's the main difference: Individual health care spending".
As an aside, if you hadn't realized before, Medicare for All will kick millions of Americans off their private health insurance plans. Warren spent weeks, and two straight Democratic presidential main debates, refusing to supply a straight reply on if she'd have to extend center class taxes to make the numbers work.
Medicare for All legislation stands little chance of passing the U.S. Congress even if Democrats succeed in taking control of both chambers as well as the presidency, given the skepticism among some moderate Democrats and the opposition of Republicans. Passing the law would be hard, even if Democrats control both chambers, given the opposition from some moderate members of the party.
"They are underestimating the new federal taxes needed to pay for this by about 15 trillion dollars over 10 years", said Emory University economist Ken Thorpe, who has done his own estimates of Medicare for All.
According to her campaign, the current USA health system will cost $52tn over the next decade. However, they would pay taxes on whatever extra take-home pay they would receive in this new system. It will also largely tax the rich.
Sen. Warren estimates these policy choices will save about $13 trillion over 10 years, leading to a $20.5 trillion funding gap to be covered by new taxes. She also refers to the Pentagon's OCO budget as a "slush fund", an assessment shared by other lawmakers and experts.