Anyone willing to give up Medicare?

We often hear from people fortunate enough to have good health insurance statements like, "I'm glad I have good supplemental coverage; I pay only small out-of-pocket expenses."

Never mind that, in 2019, 23 million Americans had medical debts, with the collective national burden estimated at $195 billion. All health insurance policies, public and private, have loopholes, inequities and shortfalls, but the problems are biggest in the less regulated private sector.

Medical debts arise from denied claims and out-of-network care. They often come as surprise bills, even for those who already pay high deductibles, co-insurance and copays, and they can be devastating.

But the burden is unequally distributed: Despite their higher health care needs, only 6% of seniors have significant medical debt, compared to 8% of adults aged 18 to 34, and 12% of 35to 64-year-olds.

These figures prove Medicare is a safety net for seniors. Adding an Advantage benefit plan may sound reassuring, but remember these plans receive higher government reimbursement rate than traditional Medicare does, and have a more inefficient bureaucracy.

As taxpayers, we all end up subsidizing these insurance corporations. Before attaching the socialist label to Medicare for All ("Medicare pays only small percentage," Gary Hartman, April 16), ask any senior American or politician if he's willing to give up Medicare; and if it's a social benefit and safety net for seniors, on what moral or economic ground can we deny it to younger generations, the millions of working Americans struggling to access affordable health care?

Chinh Le Corvallis