November, 29 2018, 11:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Robert Pollin, pollin@econs.umass.edu
Jeannette Wicks-Lim, wickslim@peri.umass.edu
Jared Sharpe, 413/545-3809, jsharpe@umass.edu
In-Depth Analysis by Team of UMass Amherst Economists Shows Viability of Medicare For All
Comprehensive plan is estimated to reduce U.S. health consumption expenditures by nearly 10 percent, while providing decent health care coverage to all Americans
AMHERST, Mass.
A team of economists from the University of Massachusetts Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) has found that the Medicare for All Act of 2017, introduced to the United States Senate by Senator Bernie Sanders, is not only economically viable, but could actually reduce health consumption expenditures by about 9.6 percent while also providing decent health care coverage for all Americans.
In a nearly 200-page report released at the Sanders Institute Gathering, the first major event hosted by the think tank founded by Jane O'Meara Sanders and David Driscoll, the senator's wife and son, the economists outline seven major aspects of transforming the U.S. health care system, detailing step-by-step the actions needed to be taken to achieve truly universal health care and its potential impacts on individuals, families, businesses and government. The analysis, which was in development for 18 months, has received praise from 11 distinguished experts in the fields of economics and health care studies who have rigorously reviewed the researchers' findings.
"The most fundamental goals of Medicare for All are to significantly improve health care outcomes for everyone living in the United States while also establishing effective cost controls throughout the health care system. These two purposes are both achievable," says lead author Robert Pollin, Distinguished Professor in economics at UMass Amherst and co-director of PERI. "As of 2017, the U.S. was spending about $3.24 trillion on personal health care--about 17 percent of total GDP. Meanwhile, 9 percent of U.S. residents have no insurance and 26 percent are underinsured--they are unable to access needed care because of prohibitively high costs. Other high-income countries spend an average of about 40 percent less per person and produce better health outcomes. Medicare for All could reduce total health care spending in the U.S. by nearly 10 percent, to $2.93 trillion, while creating stable access to good care for all U.S. residents."
The PERI research team of Pollin, James Heintz, Peter Arno, Jeannette Wicks-Lim and Michael Ash, found that Medicare for All would reduce annual health care spending to $2.93 trillion from the current level of $3.24 trillion. Public health care revenue sources that presently provide about 60 percent of all U.S. health care financing, including funding for Medicare and Medicaid, would provide $1.88 trillion of financing for the new system. Removing the other costs attributed with the current system would leave a gap of $1.05 trillion, which the economists suggest could be raised with a set of four proposals that will generate enough revenue to create a surplus of 1 percent for the system.
The researchers propose:
- Continuing business health care premiums, but with a cut of 8 percent relative to existing spending per worker. Businesses that have been providing coverage for their employees would thereby see their health care costs fall by between about 8-13 percent. ($623 billion)
- A 3.75 percent sales tax on non-necessities, which includes exemptions for spending on necessities such as food and beverages consumed at home, housing and utilities, education and non-profits. The researchers include a 3.75 percent income tax credit for families currently insured by Medicaid. ($196 billion)
- A net worth tax of 0.38 percent, with an exemption for the first $1 million in net worth. The researchers state that this tax would therefore apply to only the wealthiest 12 percent of U.S. households. ($193 billion)
- Taxing long-term capital gains as ordinary income. ($69 billion)
Under these recommendations, the researchers find that the net costs of health care for middle-income families would fall by between 2.6 and 14 percent of income. For high-income families health care costs will rise, but only to an average of 3.7 percent of income for those in the top 20 percent income group, and to 4.7 percent of income for the top 5 percent.
The researchers also find that based on 2017 U.S. health care expenditure figures, the cumulative savings for the first decade operating under Medicare for All would be $5.1 trillion, equal to 2.1 percent of cumulative GDP, without accounting for broader macroeconomic benefits such as increased productivity, greater income equality and net job creation through lower operating costs for small- and medium-sized businesses.
"Medicare for All will produce large cost savings for both businesses and households," says co-author Jeannette Wicks-Lim, associate research professor at PERI. "Under our proposal, all businesses that now provide health care coverage for their employees will receive an across-the-board 8 percent cut in premiums. For families, our results show that Medicare for All will promote both lower average costs and greater equity. For example, middle-income families who now purchase private insurance on the individual market would see their health care costs fall by an average of 14 percent under Medicare for All."
"This study is the most comprehensive, detailed, authoritative study ever undertaken of Medicare for All, and it points powerfully and unassailably in support of MFA," said economist and public policy expert Jeffrey Sachs, University Professor at Columbia University, in reviewing the researchers' analysis. "Medicare for All promises a system that is fairer, more efficient, and vastly less expensive than America's bloated, monopolized, over-priced and under-performing private health insurance system. America spends far more on health care and gets far less for its money than any other high-income country. This study explains why, and shows how Medicare for All offers a proven and wholly workable way forward."
In his review of the report, William Hsiao, K.T. Li Professor of Economics at the Harvard University T.H. Chan School of Public Health, said the study "presents an objective, unbiased, comprehensive and thorough economic analysis of Medicare for All. Professor Pollin and his co-authors have set a new high standard for transparency and clarity in presenting their analyses, estimations, and conclusions. The research methods they used to estimate both the cost increases and savings are sound. The assumptions they used to generate cost estimations are based on the latest empirical evidence. Consequently, the conclusions of this study on the overall costs and savings of Medicare for All are reasonable and scientifically sound."
"This stellar economic analysis of a single-payer, universal health care system for the U.S. is the first to sufficiently document each step of the calculations, enabling reproducibility of the findings. It is also the first study that thoroughly addresses the transition to and financing of a universal health care system for the U.S.," said Alison Galvani, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Modeling and Analysis and Burnett and Stender Families' Professor of Epidemiology at Yale University, in her review of the report. "Underlying the analysis is an interdisciplinary evidence base that has been compiled from literature spanning economics, health policy and clinical care both within the US and internationally. The methodology is sound and the assumptions are conservative with regard to their conclusions. Specifically, lower-end figures from the expert literature are used in the calculation of savings, whereas anticipated expenditures are based on the higher end of empirical distributions. Despite stacking the deck against Medicare for All, this analysis convincingly demonstrates the substantial improvements in cost efficiency that could be achieved by Medicare for All. I am confident that the Pollin et al. study will become recognized as the seminal analysis of a single-payer universal health care system for the U.S."
Pollin and Wicks-Lim were joined in crafting the analysis by UMass Amherst colleagues James Heintz, associate director and Andrew Glyn Professor of Economics, Peter Arno, senior fellow and director of health policy research, and Michael Ash, senior research fellow and professor of economics and public policy.
The complete report, "Economic Analysis of Medicare for All:" can be found online here (pdf).
The full set of reviews of the report by economics and health care studies experts can be found here.
LATEST NEWS
Trump Urges Gaza Cease-Fire Deal—And End to Netanyahu Corruption Trial in Israel
The U.S. president's comments came as Israel's military continued to kill Palestinians and order evacuations in the besieged enclave.
Jun 29, 2025
"MAKE THE DEAL IN GAZA. GET THE HOSTAGES BACK!!!" U.S. President Donald Trump said on social media early Sunday, as Israeli forces—armed with billions of dollars in military support from the United States—continued their nearly 21-month annihilation of the Palestinian territory.
Trump's Truth Social post came after he suggested on Friday that there could be a cease-fire deal between the Israeli government and Hamas, a Palestinian militant group that governed Gaza for nearly two decades and led the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, "within the next week."
As The Associated Pressreported Sunday:
Ron Dermer, a top adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, was set to travel to Washington this week for talks on a cease-fire, an Israeli official said, and plans were being made for Netanyahu to travel there in the coming weeks, a sign there may be movement on a deal.
Netanyahu was meeting with his Security Cabinet on Sunday evening, the official said on condition of anonymity to discuss plans that hadn't been finalized.
Trump's post calling for a deal also came just hours after he took to his Truth Social network to criticize the corruption trial that Netanyahu faces in Israel. Some critics of the prime minister have accused him of continuing the assault on Gaza to avoid his legal issues at home.
Saturday evening, Trump wrote:
It is terrible what they are doing in Israel to Bibi Netanyahu. He is a War Hero, and a Prime Minister who did a fabulous job working with the United States to bring Great Success in getting rid of the dangerous Nuclear threat in Iran. Importantly, he is right now in the process of negotiating a Deal with Hamas, which will include getting the Hostages back. How is it possible that the Prime Minister of Israel can be forced to sit in a Courtroom all day long, over NOTHING (Cigars, Bugs Bunny Doll, etc.). It is a POLITICAL WITCH HUNT, very similar to the Witch Hunt that I was forced to endure. This travesty of “Justice” will interfere with both Iran and Hamas negotiations. In other words, it is INSANITY doing what the out-of-control prosecutors are doing to Bibi Netanyahu. The United States of America spends Billions of Dollar a year, far more than on any other Nation, protecting and supporting Israel. We are not going to stand for this. We just had a Great Victory with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu at the helm—And this greatly tarnishes our Victory. LET BIBI GO, HE’S GOT A BIG JOB TO DO!
Then, Reutersrevealed Sunday that the Jerusalem District Court canceled this week's hearings for Netanyahu's trial, "accepting a request the Israeli leader made citing classified diplomatic and security grounds."
The news agency noted that "it was unclear whether a social media post by... Trump influenced the court's decision."
Meanwhile, Netanyahu's military kept slaughtering Palestinians in Gaza this weekend. In addition to the warrant for the prime minister issued last year by the International Criminal Court—which sparked retaliation from Trump—Israel faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice.
Gaza health officials said that as of midday Sunday, Israeli attacks had killed at least 86 people in the previous 24 hours, and put the death toll since October 2023 at 56,500, with 133,419 others wounded.
With thousands more Palestinians missing in the destroyed enclave, researchers have warned that the true toll could be far higher, particularly when accounting for deaths from causes such as disease, hunger, and exposure to cold temperatures.
The Israeli military on Sunday issued evacuation orders for neighborhoods in Gaza City and other northern areas of the strip.
According to the BBC:
Medics said five people were killed in an Israeli airstrike on a tent housing displaced people in al-Mawasi near the southern city of Khan Younis—an area where people in the north had been told to evacuate to.
Five members of the Maarouf family, including three children, were killed.
"They bombed us while we were sleeping on the ground," their mother Iman Abu Maarouf said. "We didn't do anything wrong. My children were killed, and the rest are in intensive care."
Israel's attacks have crippled Gaza's healthcare system, and its blockade has limited the flow of essentials, from medical supplies to food. Israeli troops have also killed Palestinians seeking aid from the U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF).
The Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)—or Doctors Without Borders—emergency coordinator in Gaza, Aitor Zabalgogeazkoa, excoriated the GHF operation and Israeli forces in a Friday statement.
"The four distribution sites, all located in areas under the full control of Israeli forces after people had been forcibly displaced from there, are the size of football fields surrounded by watch points, mounds of earth, and barbed wire. The fenced entrance gives only one access point in or out," he said. "GHF workers drop the pallets and the boxes of food and open the fences, allowing thousands in all at once to fight down to the last grain of rice."
"If people arrive early and approach the checkpoints, they get shot. If they arrive on time, but there is an overflow and they jump over the mounds and the wires, they get shot," Zabalgogeazkoa continued. "If they arrive late, they shouldn't be there because it is an 'evacuated zone,' they get shot."
Sharing the statement on social media Sunday, MSF said: "This is not humanitarian aid. It is slaughter."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Public Land Sale Out, But Senate GOP Megabill Still Attacks Planet
"It's a job killer, a planet killer, and an economy killer," Sen. Ed Markey said of Republicans' so-called Big Beautiful Bill.
Jun 29, 2025
While welcoming that U.S. Senate Republicans are removing a provision that would have forced the sale of public lands from their budget reconciliation package, Democratic lawmakers and environmentalists this weekend condemned other attacks on the planet that are part of the megabill making its way through the upper chamber.
After Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough blocked Sen. Mike Lee's (R-Utah) initial public land sale policy earlier this week, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources chair tried to sneak in an amended version late Friday. However, as the chamber's Republicans scrambled to generate enough support for a procedural vote Saturday night, Lee announced the withdrawal of his provision from the package.
"This is a momentous win for conservation and a powerful reminder that Americans deeply value our public lands and waters. That was made crystal clear by the remarkable, bipartisan outcry opposing the liquidation of our natural heritage," said Tom Kiernan, president and CEO of American Rivers. "Future generations should be able to continue to use these lands for fishing, rafting, hiking, and swimming, and to enjoy the clean water that begins in these priceless places. It is our responsibility to protect that legacy."
Athan Manuel, director of the Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program, said that "from the moment Mike Lee first introduced this proposal, Americans across the political spectrum have made it clear they oppose selling off the natural heritage of our public lands to fund tax cuts for billionaires—not now, not ever. This is a victory for everyone who hikes, hunts, explores, and cherishes these places, but it's not the end of the threats to our public lands."
U.S. President Donald Trump "and his allies in Congress have made it clear they will use every tool at their disposal to give away our public lands to billionaires and corporate polluters, whether it's Mike Lee's fire sale, leasing them to Big Oil CEOs for pennies on the dollar, or gutting the permitting and oversight process for industrial development," Manuel warned. "This fight isn't over, and we are going to keep working to keep the 'public' in public lands."
We won this battle, but no doubt Republicans are going to keep trying to sell off your public lands any chance they get. Our public lands are worth fighting for, and as long as I have the honor of representing Oregon in the Senate that's what I'll be doing.
— Senator Ron Wyden (@wyden.senate.gov) June 28, 2025 at 11:08 PM
Anna Peterson, executive director of the Mountain Pact, which works with over 100 communities on climate, outdoor recreation, and public lands policy, said that "as millions of Americans and western communities have reminded people again and again over the past few weeks, public lands are bipartisan, deeply revered, sustain our communities, power our economies, and serve as the cornerstone of our outdoor way of life. We must remain steadfast in our commitment to defending public lands, and continue to fight to make sure they remain where they belong forever: in public hands."
The Natural Resources Defense Council had criticized both the axed public land sale provision and attacks on renewable energy, which remain in the megabill. NRDC executive director Christy Goldfuss said that "the new budget reconciliation bill text is a shocking fossil fuels industry fever dream come to life. The corruption on display is galling."
"The bill has gone from fossil fuels boosterism to an active effort from Congress to kill wind and solar energy in the United States. This cannot be viewed as anything other than a 'Trump energy tax,'" Goldfuss said, blasting Republican plans to not only end incentives for renewable energy, but also impose new taxes on wind and solar generation.
"This bill was already going to force the biggest utility bill increase in history, but the new language can only be interpreted as a corrupt effort to advance oil, gas, and coal on the backs of everyday Americans," she continued. "This is a shocking effort to manipulate energy markets, siphon money from every household in the country, kill jobs, and shut down the fastest growing segment of the energy economy--all to enrich the barons at the helm of the most profitable enterprise in history."
Referencing one of Trump's early executive orders, Goldfuss added that "the administration claims that we are in an energy emergency, making it the wrong time to choke off the cheapest and fastest-to-deploy sources of energy."
Adrian Deveny, founder and president of policy advisory firm Climate Vision and a former policy director to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), toldPolitico: "It's a kill shot. This new excise tax on wind and solar is designed to fully kill the industry."
Costa Samaras, a clean energy leader in former Democratic President Joe Biden's White House, also warned on the social media network Bluesky on Saturday that the policy would kill Americans.
"The new bill in Congress puts a new tax on wind and solar. They're taxing clean energy to give your money to billionaires," Samaras said. "Taxing clean energy and making it harder for new clean energy to be built in the U.S. at a time when the grid is under increasing stress from extreme weather, will lead to people dying in heatwaves."
"They are taxing wind and solar power. Not just taking away the credits in Biden's climate law. But actively taxing wind and solar. My god this bill is terrible," he continued. "If you have a [Republican] representative, call and leave a message saying you don't want to raise taxes on clean energy... If you're a reporter, there's a story here. Why is the Senate putting the grid and Americans' lives at risk?"
Senate Democrats are also speaking out about the GOP assault on renewable energy. Sens. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) are among those sounding the alarm.
"Big Oil has been getting tax breaks for more than a century," noted Markey. "Trump's big billionaire bill doesn't just cut clean energy incentives, it RAISES TAXES on wind and solar. It's a job killer, a planet killer, and an economy killer."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watch: After Key Senate Vote Dems Force Reading of 940-Page GOP Megabill
"If Senate Republicans won't tell the American people what's in this bill, then Democrats are going to force this chamber to read it from start to finish," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Jun 29, 2025
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
After an hourslong delay from the initial goal of noon, U.S. Senate Republicans on Saturday night kicked off the process of passing their 940-page budget reconciliation package—which the chamber's Democrats are making the clerks read in full, not only to draw out the process but also to highlight the various provisions expected to harm American families while giving tax cuts to the rich.
"Senate Republicans are scrambling to pass a radical bill, released to the public in the dead of night, praying the American people don't realize what's in it," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the chamber's floor. "If Senate Republicans won't tell the American people what's in this bill, then Democrats are going to force this chamber to read it from start to finish."
Watch the bill reading:
After the reading, senators shift to debate and the period when they can offer amendments, known as the vote-a-rama. At this point, a final vote is expected sometime Monday. The House of Representatives has already passed its own version but must pass identical text before the bill can go to U.S. President Donald Trump's desk.
The Senate's updated bill text was released late Friday. Republicans then spent Saturday scrambling for enough support for the procedural vote. Ultimately, only Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) voted with Democrats against considering the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump wants to sign by July 4, or Independence Day.
Tillis explained his position in a lengthy statement, saying in part: "I cannot support this bill in its current form. It would result in tens of billions of dollars in lost funding for North Carolina, including our hospitals and rural communities. This will force the state to make painful decisions like eliminating Medicaid coverage for hundreds of thousands in the expansion population, and even reducing critical services for those in the traditional Medicaid population."
Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) pointed out Saturday that "while Republican senators are securing baubles and trinkets for their political donors, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that the Senate bill will cut $930 billion from Medicaid." That preliminary analysis doesn't account for other attacks on healthcare, including the Affordable Care Act.
"Just as before, these cruel cuts to Americans' healthcare will strike a mortal blow to rural healthcare, and threaten the health and safety of kids, seniors, Americans with disabilities, and working families across the country," Wyden warned. "Life and death decisions of this magnitude should not be subjected to this rushed and reckless process. I urge Republican senators not to travel down this dangerous path: there is no band-aid that can heal these dangerous, deadly cuts."
It’s 2AM on a Sunday and I’m heading to the Capitol to FORCE a full reading of the Republicans’ 940-page bill.This bill will rip health care coverage away from 16 million people and cut food assistance.It’s sick. And we will not stand for it.
[image or embed]
— Elizabeth Warren (@warren.senate.gov) June 29, 2025 at 2:02 AM
Paul suggested on social media Saturday evening that the GOP bill would add too much to the national debt. In his post on X, the senator also took a swipe at the platform's owner: the richest man on Earth, Elon Musk, who was the de facto leader of Trump's so-called Department of Government Efficiency until his ugly exit from government last month.
Musk, meanwhile, also took to X to blast the package, criticizing the proposed taxes on wind and solar projects: "The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country! Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future."
The bill would not only attack clean energy, but also give Big Oil $18 billion in new subsidies. Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's Energy Program, said in a Saturday statement that "these last-minute changes added in secret, behind closed doors, are breathtakingly stupid, as they would undermine thousands of energy projects under development, cause economic chaos, and make electricity more expensive and less reliable for Americans."
"Senate Republicans have zero interest in pursuing measured, thoughtful policy, and instead are only interested in pleasing Trump and extreme oil and gas campaign donors with inane culture war nonsense. The American people deserve better from their Senators than this absurd, harmful charade," he continued. "Trump's oil and gas donors will be delighted, but these cuts will hit America's working families with more expensive energy bills and less reliable service."
While celebrating the 51-49 procedural vote—and specifically praising Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), and Rick Scott (R-Fla.) for their crucial support—Trump lashed out at both Paul and Tillis on his Truth Social platform Saturday, threatening the latter with a primary challenge. On Sunday, Tillis announced he will not seek reelection next year.
Politicoreported that on Saturday, "Vice President JD Vance arrived at the Capitol shortly after 8:00 pm to break a possible tie," with Johnson, Paul, and Tillis having already voted "no." Johnson changed his vote after negotiations that involved Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), Majority Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Finance Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Budget Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and the other holdouts listed by Trump.
One win for critics of the megabill is the removal of Lee's provision to force the sale of public lands, which had generated widespread opposition, including from some Republican lawmakers. Lee had tried to slip a rewritten version of the measure back into the package after Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled against it earlier this week.
Still, advocates, clergy, and people at risk because of the Republican bill are planning a Moral Monday demonstration at the U.S. Capitol—with 51 caskets—to call out GOP attacks on Medicaid, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and tax credits for working families.
"If this budget passes, it will unleash years of needless suffering on our nation's most vulnerable, preying on those with the least and undermining the dignity of hardworking, low-wage Americans. We must not—and will not—stop praying and advocating against this deadly and unjust bill," said Bishop William J. Barber II, president of Repairers of the Breach.
Barber, who has been arrested at the Capitol with other moral leaders, added that "we are going back to the Rotunda to pray—because we love the people of this nation too much to remain silent, and so we must raise our voices in moral demonstration and dissent."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular