Senate candidates poorly informed on Medicare for All | Letter

As a Medicare for All advocate, I appreciated Randy Billings’ reporting on the positions of Troy Jackson and Susan Collins, but I was surprised to see how poorly informed both senatorial candidates are about this central campaign issue.

Susan Collins dismisses Medicare for All as too expensive and a mere slogan. She ignores the careful study it has received, including economic analyses showing it is not only feasible but would actually save money.

For example, in 2020, the Congressional Budget Office projected that in 2030, under our current system, national health expenditures (NHE) would total $6.6 trillion annually. Under Medicare for All, national health expenditures would be reduced by $650 billion or about 10%. This equates to $1,900 per capita, the average annual savings to an individual.

Thus, for less than we are spending now, we could cover the entire population (i.e., achieve universal healthcare) with benefits more comprehensive than most of us receive now. This would be achieved by simplifying the payment system to reduce payers’ and providers’ administrative costs and by negotiating prices. The government would be the sole insurer, collecting the premiums — probably in the form of a graduated payroll tax — and paying all the bills. Troy Jackson is mistaken when he says that only billionaires and corporations would pay.

The key point — often not understood — is that the lower cost of Medicare for All would replace— not be added to — what we are paying now to finance what is universally acknowledged to be an unsatisfactory system.

Michael Bacon
Westbrook

Copy the Story Link

Tagged: election 2026, letter to the editor, senate 2026