Should the United States Implement a Universal System?

Universal Health System in the United States Name Institution Course Professor Date Universal Health System in the United States Should the United States Implement a Universal System? Introduction Millions of Americans are at risk from excessive medical costs and limited access to care, as the U.S. is still one of the few wealthy countries without a universal healthcare system. Disparities, inefficiency, and wasteful spending are caused by the privatized system, harming the economy and people alike. In addition to lowering total healthcare costs and guaranteeing fair access to medical treatments, a universal healthcare system would significantly enhance public health. The United States should implement a universal health system to boost public health outcomes, minimize healthcare costs, and offer all citizens equitable medical services. Improving Public Health Outcomes One of the most important reasons the United States should have a universal healthcare system is the potential to improve public health results. Many Americans now delay obtaining medical care due to financial considerations, which can lead to worse health results and increased long-term costs. Universal healthcare systems contribute to reduced death rates and improved overall health through the early diagnosis and treatment of illness. Galvani et al. (2020) estimate that shifting to a single-payer model would save 68,000 lives annually and capture 1.73 million life-years by increasing preventive and primary care availability (p. 9). Universal healthcare countries such as Canada and Germany report decreased preventable illness rates and enhanced health indicators, attesting to the success of a public-funded system (Cornelius, 2022). Zieff et al. (2020) argue that establishing universal healthcare in the U.S. would improve overall public health by facilitating access to universal medical care. A universal system can increase the nation's health crisis response capacity and reduce disparities, ultimately reducing preventable health crises. Greater access to healthcare would also have strong economic benefits by reducing cumulative healthcare expenditure. Studies reveal that universal health schemes reduce administration costs and wastage in private insurance. Single-payer arrangements would streamline billing and reduce overhead expenses, investing more funds in patient care. According to Galvani et al. (2020), "With the uncoupling of employment status from insurance plans, a single-payer system would also resolve the disconnection under the current system that arises during employment transition if, for example, a patient's former doctor is considered out-of-network under a new employer's insurance plan" (p. 9). Cornelius (2022) emphasizes that countries with universal healthcare spend significantly lower per capita on healthcare costs but have better health outcomes. In addition, greater access to preventive care may reduce emergency department visits and hospitalizations, which are generally expensive for patients and the healthcare system. If the U.S. moved to a publicly funded system, it would improve efficiency, lower healthcare costs, and promote financial security among individuals and families. Reducing Healthcare Costs A universal healthcare system would also reduce the issue of runaway healthcare expenditures in the U.S. Administrative overhead, profit-driven insurance companies, and high pharmaceutical prices burden the current system. Crowley et al. (2020) highlight that shifting to a single-payer system simplifies billing, reduces overhead costs, and allows for government-negotiated drug prices, resulting in enormous financial savings. Crowley et al. (2020) argue that "government-run, single-payer systems create a more affordable and portable healthcare model, reducing corporate influence" (p. S11). In addition, Galvani et al. (2020) highlight that Medicare for all can decrease national healthcare expenditure by 13% without any reduction in the quality of services or even with an increase in quality (p. 8). The overhead expenses in private insurance systems significantly cause healthcare inefficiencies, while a universal system would merge operations and eliminate duplicate expenditures. The Investopedia Team (2023) explains that the United States spends much more on healthcare than other high-income nations but achieves lower health outcomes. Furthermore, establishing a government-funded healthcare system would minimize out-of-pocket spending for patients, making medical services affordable and accessible to people from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. A universal healthcare system would promote cost-effectiveness due to reduced preventable hospitalizations and emergency room visits. Cornelius (2022) indicates that countries with universal healthcare experience fewer costly emergency services due to improved access to preventive care. In the current U.S. setup, a large number of uninsured or underinsured individuals delay medical care until later when the diseases become severe, resulting in expensive treatments that would have been avoidable with early intervention. Cornelius (2022) states that in European countries with universal healthcare, maternal mortality rates are sign...