The U.S. is one of the wealthiest countries around the globe and a world-renowned economic superpower. Despite this, our nation falls behind in providing humane and equitable health services to its citizens. With the vast amounts of resources at our country’s disposal, our government should have the ability to subsidize a public health care system. Yet, the money-making, monopolistic scheme of privatized health care continues to tear the fabric of American morality, leaving many uninsured and uncovered. Currently, steep health care expenses are turning these crucial services into a privilege and a source of profit rather than a fundamental human right — a problem that could be resolved by minimizing privatized health care and corporate exploitation.
Depending on the company and plan, insurance is generally used to aid individuals with covering the high costs of medical expenses. However, health insurance itself is experiencing skyrocketing prices that are predicted to rise 6.5% this year. Consequently, it is not unusual for low-income families to refrain from health coverage. Nearly 1 in 10, or roughly 8%, of Americans do not have health insurance, which severely restricts their access to necessary medical services, as uninsured citizens have to make out-of-pocket payments or rely on government services such as Medicaid, an unstable government-health subsidy. Medical-related debt or unaffordable payments have thus affected around 116 million underinsured Americans, causing many to file for bankruptcy and even lose their homes in an effort to compensate for these debts, since these expenses are significantly disproportionate to their income.
Those who are paying the steep cost of insurance coverage still experience difficulties since health insurance does not guarantee care. A CBS news report found that 38% of Americans with health insurance have delayed or opted out of medical attention or treatment due to high out-of-pocket costs that their insurance does not cover.
In addition, those who choose to pursue covered care often encounter lengthy waiting periods before they are seen and treated by a health care provider. This is due to private medical clinics, which show significantly lower efficiency rates than other countries’ methods of providing health care, resulting in 28% of clients receiving unreliable care. Even in the public health care system, private, for-profit clinics open “private express lanes” that increase wait times in these public clinics. At the same time, these same private clinics and hospitals will turn away uninsured patients (even in the event of an emergency) due to a lack of profit, forcing them to seek out care at a public institution.
A privatized medical industry prioritizes obtaining a profit that is often accumulated illegally and unethically. For instance, in 2022, UnitedHealth group, a large private insurance firm, made a total yearly profit of $20 billion. Meanwhile, the insurance conglomerate was accused of defrauding the elderly by denying them medical coverage using AI technology, known as nH Predict, to evaluate claims that included elderly care. The company supposedly knew the technology was producing an error-rate of 90% and continued using it to refuse patients for profit. They are now facing a class action lawsuit that has yet to be resolved. Similarly, Elevance Health, a leading health insurance group, gained $168.2 billion in revenue in 2023. But, this money was gained through Elevance’s avoidance of paying claims submitted by individuals enrolled in Medicaid and Medicare Advantage. The company refused to pay for prescription medications and procedures, subsequently forcing government intervention.
Other countries, such as Canada, discourage private clinic usage and have increased the prominence of government-subsidized health care. European countries fund hospitals and clinics through citizen taxation, so the majority of clinics are government-owned. In Germany, approximately 88% of the population receives “statutory health insurance,” a form of government-provided health care with an 85% approval rate from the general public.
Countries that use private industries in health care are careful to maintain tight regulations and government funding to ensure universal access and non-exploitative action, unlike the U.S. For example, the Netherlands has a high quality of health care, ranking fifth in the world, while keeping an affordable annual cost of $1,615 per person for general services. The Netherlands is also praised for quick and efficient services with 87% of patients receiving treatment and medical attention in one day or less.
Despite these examples of successful universal health care, the U.S. continues to function off of private health care corporations. This is partly due to the influence of wealth and how these corporations wield funding to influence political actions that allow them to remain in power with limited to no regulations. In 2020, Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-Vt.) developed the Medicare for All Act that aimed to implement a type of universal health care and eliminate privatization. During his campaign at the time, President Joe Biden claimed the bill would cause delays in health care security despite research suggesting its economic and political viability. Unsurprisingly, Biden’s campaign had received large donations from 15 top executives of private pharmaceutical and health insurance companies. Throughout his presidency, Biden has continued to cater legislation and proposed bills toward for-profit, private health insurance firms.
Another example of a swayed politician is former President Donald Trump, whose campaign received $1.4 million from private health care sectors and $3.2 million from pharmaceutical corporations. Prior to this, Trump had voiced his support of universal healthcare, but he began to argue against it during his campaigning period, signaling corporate influence.
As long as corporate entities prominently exist within the healthcare industry, people will continue to be exploited. Corporations care only for financial satiety rather than the general wellness of the public. While developing a health care system free of flaws is a complex issue, minimizing private sectors by implementing public care is a strong start to ensuring equitable and universal health care access for all.
