The Problem with the “Canadian Model”
The successes of Canadian single-payer are overstated — not because of outsized government involvement, but because public provision isn’t generous enough.
Canada’s universal public health care system is a political football in American politics. Liberals cite it as a model, while conservatives use it is an example of government inefficiency that leads to substandard care and, even worse, death panels.
Liberals do have a stronger argument. Canada’s single-payer system has obvious advantages over its private-heavy American counterpart. There are lower administrative costs. A catastrophic illness will not result in bankruptcy for low- and middle-income households. Regardless of class, people generally get the care they need.
But the successes of the single-payer are habitually overstated — not because of outsized government involvement, but because public provision isn’t generous or expansive enough. Gaps have always existed in Canada’s system, and despite 90-plus percent public support, there’s been a slow-but-determined chipping away at the social program.