Single-payer healthcare is back on the legislative agenda in New York, California, and Oregon. And just like previous efforts by state governments to take over their health insurance markets, these new ones are nothing to celebrate.
Single-payer healthcare invariably leads to long waits for low-quality care, all paid for by sky-high taxes.
Sadly, the idea just won't die.
Take the Empire State's recent push to revive the New York Health Act, which would sweep all New Yorkers into a new government-financed health plan known as New York Health.
The bill, whose history stretches back three decades, has featured in the budget talks underway in the New York State Assembly and has even earned the backing of incoming Assembly Health Committee Chair Amy Paulin.
Of course, there's a reason why, after all this time, the New York Health Act has yet to become law.
It's cripplingly expensive.
An analysis of a previous version of the bill by the RAND Corporation estimated that, in 2022 alone, New York Health would require $139 billion in new tax revenue.
That's 156% more than the state's current annual tax take.
Meanwhile, California's nursing union is continuing its fight to bring single-payer to the Golden State.
The group has long been one of the state's fiercest advocates for socialized medicine.
Now, it's pushing for AB 1690, a spot bill declaring the legislature's intent to enact single-payer sometime next year.
California's previous single-payer efforts have failed to gain traction, largely for the same reasons the New York Health Act has languished.
By one estimate, installing a state-run health plan in California would cost $400 billion a year. The governor's proposed budget for all state spending in 2023-24, for comparison, is $230 billion.
The Oregon Senate's recent single-payer bill, SB 704, may best illustrate the fallacy at the heart of state-run health insurance.
The bill aims to install a single-payer system in the state as soon as 2027.
To that end, it puts in place a Universal Health Plan Governance Board tasked with designing the new healthcare system from scratch.
The idea that a committee of supposed experts can remake an entire segment of a state's economy from the top down — and in just a few years — is as dangerous as it is fantastical.
After all, it's this kind of hubris that has led to healthcare catastrophes in single-payer systems elsewhere globally.
Look at what's happening in Great Britain's government-run system, the National Health Service. At last count, a record 7.2 million patients in England were waiting for care —roughly 12% of the country.
One-third of patients who have had heart attacks are not getting full treatment within 18 weeks, as clinically recommended.
In Scotland, nearly 7,000 people have been waiting more than two years for hospital care.
In Wales, almost 75,000 people have been waiting more than a year for outpatient care.
Is it any wonder that Brits are signing up for private coverage today?
In Canada's single-payer system, patients faced a median wait of 27.4 weeks for treatment from a specialist following referral by a general practitioner.
That's more than half a year.
In order to alleviate those waits, the country's most populous province, Ontario, is considering legislation that would significantly expand the use of private clinics.
Oregon's single-payer bill comes just months after voters there passed Measure 111, which amends the state's constitution to guarantee residents a right to cost-effective, clinically appropriate healthcare.
As Great Britain's and Canada's crises show, a government-run health bureaucracy is no way to go about fulfilling that promise.
America's market-oriented approach to healthcare remains the best solution yet devised for delivering affordable, timely, high-quality care while also encouraging innovation and medical progress.
Even life-long single-payer advocate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., of admitted recently that his vision of Medicare for All has no chance of moving forward this year, given Republican control of the House.
It's mystifying that state lawmakers would consider swapping the status quo for a government-run system that has brought about long waits, subpar care, and crushing tax burdens everywhere it has ever been tried.
Sally C. Pipes is president, CEO, and the Thomas W. Smith fellow in healthcare policy at the Pacific Research Institute. Her latest book is "False Premise, False Promise: The Disastrous Reality of Medicare for All," (Encounter Books 2020). Follow her on Twitter @sallypipes. Read Sally Pipes' Reports — More Here.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.