Letter to the editor: 'Medicare for all' is political folly

I am over 65, and Medicare is my primary medical insurance provider. Approximately one year ago, I was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer (Stage 2). My chosen medical team from a large regional medical care provider put together a comprehensive program of care. The full retail cost of my treatment to date exceeds three-quarters of a million dollars. Medicare in its review of medical cost submissions by my providers approved only 13% of the aggregate cost.

To what extent my treatment was subsidized by the other operations of the large medical provider? Impossible to tell, but it is known that regular commercial insurance plans reimburse at rates significantly higher than Medicare and therefore make current Medicare reimbursements viable.

“Medicare for All” would require an extensive rework of the reimbursement system, as current Medicare reimbursements won’t sustain the medical system we have, resulting in shortages and rationing. An immediate problem is that current concepts for “Medicare for All” dispense with all other medical care plans with 150 to 200 million participants. Frankly, this would be political folly for the candidates promoting these schemes.

I would support an expansion of Medicare to persons 60 or older who do not have viable medical insurance.

James Kvitkovich

Hempfield