Single-Payer Healthcare is better than "Obamacare"

R1: Acceptance
R2: Arguments
R3: Rebuttals
R4: Closing Statement + Rebuttal by PRO to remove the contender net advantage

PRO willl argue that Single Payer healthcare would be better for the US than Obamacare.

CON will argue that Obamacare is better than if the US had Single Payer healthcare.

I expect a fellow liberal to steal this debate.

Good luck.

C1: Financing and Cost

Single Payer

Single-Payer healthcare would save an estimated $200-400 billion over the current system because it is brilliantly simple. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Instead of having to fill out thousands of different forms to send across state lines, pay for profits, marketing, and advertising, and deal with the plethora of insurance providers, the health industry deals with one thing, the patient's health. Funding is simple and equitable.

To pay for Single-Payer healthcare, it would require the current government financing system plus a 2% income tax increase, a 7% payroll tax, and an optional Tobin tax on risky financial transactions. [2] [3]

Single Payer healthcare vastly reduces health care inflation by better health payment managing. [3] [7]


Obamacare

The costs of healthcare will be reduced by $12.4 billion a year. So, Single Payer saves over 20 times as much. Plus, Obamacare does not do anything to slow the growth of health care inflation. [6]


C2: Quality Comparison


Single Payer [8]

- Everybody assured access to care
- Able to control cost globally, affordability
- Brilliantly simple regulations and rules
- Generates database to identify disparities and track effectiveness of interventions
- Fair rules for all
- Continuity access to care regardless of socio-economic status
- Stable funding
- Uniform reimbursement and benefits package = free choice of doctor
- Greater care from network of medical professionals

Obamacare

- Many kept on the same insurance plans = limited choice of doctor, less freedom. Profits > Life
- Cost inflation continues to skyrocket
- Doesn't solve the plethora of insurance providers and the complications
- An insurance giveaway
- Access is not guaranteed
- Many dumped on Medicaid rolls


C3: Constitutionality


Single Payer

The 16th amendment gives Congress the power to levy taxes on income. Thus, a Single Payer health care system funded by general tax revenues would be Constitutional.

Obamacare

It forces people to buy a defected product. Not Constitutional by most concerns.



-----Conclusion:-----


Obamacare just forces people to buy a defected product. There is NOT free choice of doctor. Many are put on the defected Medicaid rolls. Health care inflation is not solved. It doesn't solve the problem of the uninsured. And, it fails to significantly bring down costs. Overall, Obamacare fails in comparison. Plus, it is unconstitutional.

Single Payer:

-Universal, comprehensive coverage for all American citizens.
-A Single insurance plan in each region, administered at the federal level
-Global Operating budgets, competition between medical professionals
-Free Choice of Providers
-Public accountability, Federal Health Board used to oversee HC system
-Clinical System of Excellence
-Protection of Right to Health Care
-High quality and availability of HC for all
-Efficient system
-Affordable drug prices (negotiated down)
-Liberal benefits, conservative spending
-Constitutional

So, we could cover all Americans with the benefits I just summarized and proved. And, we would have a net savings of cash. Pretty common sense I think right?

Vote PRO



"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane." - Martin Luther King Jr.



Sources:

[1] http://www.pnhp.org...

[2] http://www.pnhp.org...

[3] http://www.dollarsandsense.org...

[4] http://www.cbo.gov...

[5] http://voices.yahoo.com...

[6] http://www.tnr.com...

[7] http://www.pnhp.org...

[8] http://pnhp.org...

Vote PRO,

because I was the only one to post arguments, and my opponent forfeited all the rounds besides the first one.