Many debaters' first instinct when a new resolution is announced is to think of some potential arguments to run. This process isn't easy - hence why this post exists. We're here to give you some options of the best contentions for the single-payer health care topic, and we can guarantee you'll find at least a few that will be useful.

Affirmative Arguments

1) Public Health

This contention is one of the first things you may think of when considering the current state of the health care system in America. Consider, for instance, the ongoing physician shortage, largely driven by burnout. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, doctors have been reported to cut back their hours of work and accelerate their retirement. The pandemic has highlighted disparities in access to health care and has exposed vulnerabilities in the American health care system. Clinician burnout was already an issue before the pandemic, meaning that within the last several years, burnout has only exponentially grown.

This spike in burnout is directly attributable to loss of control over work, increased performance measurement, the increasing complexity of medical care, and profound inefficiencies in the practice environment, all of which have altered patient interactions. High levels of burnout among physicians are warning signs of dysfunction. In other words, physician burnout is a public health crisis.

This is furthered when considering things like unemployment rates, which have hurt not only the economy at large, but have hit the health industry the hardest. Employment turnover among nearly all segments of the health care workforce has not yet fully recovered from the pandemic, with unemployment rates only worsening over time. Couple this with ongoing issues like loss of revenue, reduced work hours, and reduced earnings, and we have ourselves quite the pickle. Logically, some form of reform in the health care system is necessary to incentivize more labor in the field.

The single-payer health care system is a perfect tool to fix this crisis, as historically, we have seen that burnout is caused by insurance issues. Professionals feel angry and frustrated knowing that unqualified insurance company personnel have the power to override their professional judgement, and that, as a result, the health of their patients is being compromised in order for health plans to achieve short-term cost savings. The single-payer healthcare system, however, increases physician pay, avoiding cost savings from insurance companies overhead. In short, single-payer reform protects savings due to reducing the administrative role of insurance companies in the health care system.

2) Increasing Equity

The basic argument here is simple: a single-payer system would ensure more equitable coverage of the population in the United States. Currently, there exist significant disparities in health care coverage among minority groups, be it racial, socio-economic, and gender. Having access to healthcare can help prevent high medical costs and increase life expectancies. In a single-payer universal health care system, all individuals would receive coverage, regardless of their identity. Another key thing to note is that a single-payer universal healthcare system would be an effective way to increase equity and break down some of the structural inequalities that have pervaded the United States healthcare system.

3) Access to Treatment

One extremely powerful advantage the affirmative has over the negative in this topic is that there exist statistics in the status quo that are extremely detrimental for the negative. Consider, for instance, the fact that as many as 1 in 4 people in the United States have avoided some sort of medical treatment because they don't have health coverage. Solvency here is clear: switching to a single payer system would increase the ability for individuals in the US to access treatment. With the current insurance system often tied to employment, individuals who are unemployed must weigh the costs of seeking treatment against paying basic living expenses. Medical debt is the most frequent reason that individuals within the United States file for bankruptcy. A single-payer universal health care system would automatically give all people within the country access to medical care without the burden of outrageous medical bills.

4) Efficiency

Another effective argument is that a single payer system can reduce the administrative overhead and make negotiating with drug companies far more effective. If the United States federal government was the primary buyer of most drugs via a single-payer system, they would theoretically have the buying power to negotiate lower drug prices. Lower drug prices would reduce the profits of drug companies and may dissuade some investors into trying new and potentially ventures in the pharmaceutical world.

Negative Arguments

1) Lower Quality Care

The easiest argument that the negative has is that a single-payer universal system would actually lead to worse overall coverage or care. A universal healthcare system may increase wait times and decrease the quality of care. Longer wait times are associated with higher negative health outcomes and an increase of mortality. This has been an ongoing issue that has only been exacerbated by COVID-19, meaning that a single payer system may only further the issue.

2) Worker Shortages and Burnout

Another argument that the negative should consider not how a single payer system affects the consumer, but the health care workers themselves. While more coverage and access to healthcare may be positive, a single-payer universal health care plan may exacerbate burnout and lead to an even smaller supply of healthcare workers. The official opinions from some of the largest medical organizations are split on their support of universal coverage; however, some studies have indicated that implementing a single-payer system, such as Medicare for All, would result in massive shortages of healthcare workers. Implementing a single-payer system would likely lower the pay of doctors while simultaneously increasing the number of patients. More demands on doctors increases burnout levels, having detrimental economic impacts.

3) Funding

This argument is simple: how do you pay for a single-payer health care system? Almost all experts unanimously agree that in order to fund a single-payer plan, there would need to be some sort of tax hike. This could have detrimental impacts on citizens because, even if they trade off with lower premiums, families who are in middle class socioeconomic brackets may feel the strain of higher taxes. However, if we want to avoid raising taxes, the government would be forced to cut into existing social programs. In other words, there would be some sort of trade-off between either the taxpayer's dollar or another existing system.

Thus marks the end of this post. If you have any further questions, please feel free to email us via our email: resources.debate@gmail.com. Please spread the word to other debaters who you think may find this website useful! Make sure to check out our other posts, as they're guaranteed to help.