Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Deadlines
Policies
Program Updates
Accessible Presentation
FAQs
Search Tips
Annual Meeting App
Abstract
This paper consists of three interconnected components. Initially, the paper provides a brief history of health reform efforts in the United States. Beginning in the second decade of the 20th century and ending in 2010 with passage of the Affordable Care Act, this section identifies the political pitfalls associated with efforts to institute health care reform. This historical overview provides a framework from which an alternative health care system can be constructed. Historically, that alternative framework has been a single-payer health care system. This second component of the paper explores the question of what a single-payer health care system is. Noting that the most common response is “Medicare for All” based on the Canadian model, the paper questions whether that approach provides the most viable option to the current system. In order to determine whether “Medicare for All” would be the best single-payer option available, the third component provides guidance by assessing a number of health-related variables and public perception of six high-income countries that utilize various constructs of a single-payer system. These countries include Canada, Denmark, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Utilizing material from the Commonwealth Fund and statistics from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, four tables provide a basis for comparison between countries in areas such as health system core statistics, physician and hospital data, access to services, and public perception of current health system performance. An analysis of the data suggests American health reform advocates should pursue single-payer models other than Medicare for All. In particular, health care reformers should re-explore the relationship between the United Kingdom’s NHS model and the Veterans Administration structure as a more appropriate answer to the question of what should replace the current American model.