By Ajay Iyer
Over the course of the last few years, Medicare for All (M4A) has gained traction among voters, especially those within the democratic party. M4A has been considered a “leftist” policy for as long as it has existed due to the infiltration into the market of private health insurance. On the other hand, Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a relatively new concept for many voters and was recently popularized by former presidential candidate Andrew Yang. Yang championed UBI throughout his campaign in order to increase buying power and protect working-class Americans from the economic stress of automation.
What Are They?
Before delving into the effects of M4A and UBI, one must first define what these policies are. When most voters discuss M4A, they are referring to the bill penned by Senator Bernie Sanders. The main difference between this bill and others on the floor is that this M4A program would completely replace private health insurance and provide all citizens with the same coverage. It would be financed through tax increases.
UBI is a flat payment given to citizens by the government at a certain frequency. This payment would be completely blind to income, assets, and any other factors. Under Andrew Yang’s proposal, UBI would be $1,000 given on a monthly basis. It would not completely replace other programs, but citizens that opt into UBI would not be able to also receive disability payments or any other welfare payments. It would be funded through a 10% value-added tax on technology companies profiting off of automation, removing the social security cap, and charging a carbon fee.
How They Help
M4A is a policy of interest for many because it guarantees the right to healthcare regardless of economic status. In the USA, differences in coverage of private health insurance plans prevents many from receiving the care they need, and the fear of deductibles often discourages seeking care until conditions are extremely severe. M4A under Sen. Sanders’ bill would remove private health insurance and provide the same benefits to all Americans, hypothetically creating a healthier country with more access to wellness services as opposed to only treatment. On top of that, by eliminating the private health sector, the federal government will have more power over private pharmaceutical companies and should be able to regulate prices of medication and prevent the dangers of ever-increasing costs for necessary health interventions.
UBI, on the other hand, is far more economically motivated and operates primarily to put more money in the pockets of consumers. This gives citizens more economic security and allows the circulation of money through the economy, stimulating various industries. The universality of the policy widens its appeal and ensures that all people, regardless of socioeconomic status, will have the security this payment offers. This would allow individuals to also take more risks by starting companies or simply find careers they enjoy without the constant fear of running out of money.
How UBI & M4A Reduce Race-Related Issues
M4A mainly addresses uninsured or underinsured Americans, a great portion of which includes racial minorities. According to a 2010 report by the American College of Physicians (ACP), Hispanic-Americans have an uninsurance rate of 34% versus 13% among white Americans. The infant mortality rate among Black-Americans is 2.4x higher than that of white Americans, attributed to bias within healthcare systems as well as a lack of pursuance of prenatal care. M4A would drastically reduce the rate of uninsurance/underinsurance because all Americans would be granted the same comprehensive coverage and would encourage wellness and preventive care by reducing the cost concern associated with health in America currently.
UBI will have a similar impact to M4A by slightly alleviating financial fears, but will be able to have a wider influence by focusing on all parts of society that money controls. According to a 2016 survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the most common occupational sectors in the US are “Office & Administrative Support”, “Sales and Retail”, “Food Service”, “Transportation”, and “Production”. With unmanned fast food kiosks, self check-out counters, driverless modes of transportation, and other forms of automation on the rise, employees in all of these sectors are being displaced, creating greater economic fear. The careers that have not yet been automated away are mostly highly skilled and require a Bachelor’s Degree or beyond. Unfortunately, only 23% of Black Americans and 16% of Hispanic-Americans achieve a Bachelor’s Degree, compared to 36% of non-Hispanic white Americans (U.S. Census Bureau, 2016). Automation poses a grave threat to the economic security of all Americans, especially racial minorities. By providing a recurring payment that is guaranteed to every American, this fear is mitigated and our citizens are able to look past their next meal or day to a brighter and more meaningful future.
These policies will help all Americans, but will mostly benefit racial minorities in the USA most drastically because these communities are disproportionately represented in lower socioeconomic statuses.
Sources:
American College of Physicians. “RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISPARITIES IN HEALTH CARE, UPDATED 2010.” ACP, 2010, www.acponline.org/acp_policy/policies/racial_ethnic_disparities_2010.pdf.
Booth, Stephanie. “Medicare for All: What Is It and How Will It Work?” Healthline, Healthline Media, 10 Nov. 2008, www.healthline.com/health/what-medicare-for-all-would-look-like-in-america#4.
The Stanford Basic Income Lab. “Stanford Basic Income Lab: What Is UBI.” The Stanford Basic Income Lab, basicincome.stanford.edu/about/what-is-ubi/.
Yang, Andrew. “The Freedom Dividend, Defined - Yang2020 - Andrew Yang for President.” Yang2020, www.yang2020.com/what-is-freedom-dividend-faq/.
Yang, Andrew. The War on Normal People the Truth about America’s Disappearing Jobs and Why Universal Basic Income Is Our Future. Hachette Books, 2019.
Comments