Medicare for More is a good start, but it’s not a universal plan

We agree with the Dec. 2 editorial (“What’s the matter with Medicare for More?” p. 36) that a pragmatic universal healthcare plan is critical. Medicare for More, or Obamacare with a public option, are steps in the right direction, however they are not really universal healthcare plans as currently discussed because they do not mandate employer participation.

All employers should be required to provide health insurance for their workers. We support a plan that would require them to do this in an environment where private insurance companies would have to compete with a public option for their current employer base of business. This requirement would expand coverage and lower costs, without raising taxes.

The competitive public option that we envision is based on Medicare, but it is designed to cover people under 65 and would cost approximately 30% less than the average cost of employer-based private insurance today. This new competitive pressure could drastically lower costs for both employers and employees without reducing benefits.

As a result, if all employers were required to provide health insurance in a market that included a highly competitive public option, the overall cost of employer-based insurance in America could be reduced by as much as $180 billion per year.

Edward Eichhorn Dr. Michael Hutchinson Partners at Eichhorn & Hutchinson Hamilton, N.J.