# El-Sayed Backtracks on His ‘Free Healthcare’ Promise, Admits Medicare for All Would Raise Taxes ## About this report - Author: Transparency Report Staff - Report type: candidate_issue - Published: 2026-08-18T18:58:03.546Z - Last updated: 2026-08-21T12:59:30.138Z ## Full report Michigan Democrat Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed has repeatedly [touted](https://x.com/AbdulElSayed/status/2055258951202058522?s=20) Medicare for All as “free healthcare,” promising Americans coverage without premiums, copays, or deductibles and no tax increases for the middle class. After winning Michigan’s Democratic primary last week, El-Sayed [acknowledged](https://x.com/RNCResearch/status/2086457641514008633?s=20) during an Aug. 9 interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that his system would [require](https://townhall.com/news/amy-curtis/2026/08/10/abdul-el-sayed-medicare-for-all-will-raise-everyones-taxes-n2680970) middle-class Americans to pay “a little bit more in taxes.” But El-Sayed’s pitch leaves out the big picture, including several of the proposal’s largest costs and tradeoffs. While he touts his plan as a net positive for Americans, the fiscal and healthcare-system consequences projected under his radical system are far more severe than he admits. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget [estimated](https://www.congress.gov/116/meeting/house/110313/documents/HHRG-116-IF14-20191210-SD036.pdf) a single-payer system would cost more than $32 trillion over a decade. The group’s analysis found that covering roughly $30 trillion in additional federal spending over a decade entirely through income taxes could require more than doubling individual and corporate income-tax rates. Meanwhile, other [analyses](https://americashealthcarefuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/191015-PAHCF-Memo-Key-Questions-With-Gov.-Controlled-Health-Care.pdf) find that a similar system “would mean increasing federal spending by about 60% (excluding interest)” and “require the equivalent of tripling payroll taxes or more than doubling all other taxes.” Throughout his campaign, El-Sayed hasn’t been shy about his [plans](https://x.com/AbdulElSayed/status/2006192742804639830?s=20) to tax billionaires to fund any and all of his campaign promises. In last week’s interview, El-Sayed was nearly [giddy](https://x.com/RNCResearch/status/2086457641514008633?s=20) about “taxing billionaires their wealth” to cover Medicare for All costs. But other experts say only taxing billionaires won’t cut it. “No matter how you cut the numbers, there is absolutely no way to pay for Medicare for all without tax increases — or spending cuts — on the middle class,” Marc Goldwein, who oversees policy for CRFB [said](https://www.politico.com/newsletters/politico-pulse/2019/10/29/the-hard-choices-facing-medicare-for-all-781736) in 2019. El-Sayed is now coming to terms with that claim and [admitted](https://x.com/RNCResearch/status/2086458609014055308?s=20) this week that his system would pay for healthcare “in a different way,” including through taxes on the middle class. But he hasn’t specified just how much more the average household would pay in taxes. El-Sayed also attempts to paint Medicare for All as a system that would merely replace existing insurance premiums with payroll taxes, but he ignores the fact that under a private system, employers [pay](https://americashealthcarefuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/191015-PAHCF-Memo-Key-Questions-With-Gov.-Controlled-Health-Care.pdf) a significant portion of job-based insurance premiums. His plan would have to replace not only workers’ direct premium contributions but also the substantial employer spending that currently finances job-based coverage, whether through employer taxes, household taxes, or another source of federal revenue. Eliminating premiums, copays, and deductibles would likely increase demand for healthcare. One analysis [projected](https://americashealthcarefuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/KNG-Health-The-Impact-of-Medicare-for-America-FINAL-Report-Oct-2019.pdf) that a similar government-run healthcare proposal could increase healthcare spending by 11% by 2032, even if doctors and hospitals were paid less for some services. He also [touts](https://x.com/AbdulElSayed/status/1982938330301165794?s=20) Medicare for All as a win for rural communities, but the data shows rural hospitals are the exact establishments that could suffer the most. One study [found](https://guidehouse.com/-/media/www/site/insights/healthcare/2019/rural-hospital-public-option.pdf) that as many as 55% of rural hospitals could face a high risk of closure with a public-option system. And under an El-Sayed-style program [promising](https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/michigans-abdul-el-sayed-defends-medicare-for-all-plan-ahead-of-midterm-contest-52253fd7) “cradle-to-grave healthcare,” U.S. hospital systems would see a significant decrease in funding and access to healthcare. A Navigant [study](https://americashealthcarefuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Navigant_Medicare-Expansion-Hospitals.pdf) found that Medicare reimburses providers at substantially lower rates than private insurers, meaning broader use of Medicare rates would cut hospital revenue. Lower revenue would lead to smaller staff sizes, increasing wait times for patients. Under Canada’s single-payer system in 2025, Canadian patients [waited](https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/waiting-your-turn-wait-times-for-health-care-in-canada-2025) a median of 30 weeks between seeing a general practitioner for referral and receiving specialized care. Meanwhile, patients in the U.S. waited mere days in many cases. But instead of focusing on the increased wait times patients would experience under his system, El-Sayed has instead [celebrated](https://x.com/RNCResearch/status/2086458609014055308?s=20) the fact that his program would take money away from healthcare CEOs. “Instead of paying a health insurance company whose CEO makes $20 million, I would much rather pay for durable healthcare into a government,” El-Sayed said. “So if I’m trading paying a CEO to make more money or paying a government to guarantee me healthcare, I’m picking the latter every time.” El-Sayed sold voters on “free healthcare” while leaving the tax bill vague, promising better and more accessible care. But his system isn’t free, nor will it make American healthcare better. Only now is he admitting what many already knew, and voters shouldn’t continue to buy his pitch. ## Related candidates - [Abdul El-Sayed](https://transparencyreport.io/candidates/abdul-el-sayed-michigan-d-2026.md) --- Source: Transparency Report — https://transparencyreport.io/reports/el-sayed-free-healthcare-promise-raises-taxes This is the Markdown version of the page. Cite the canonical URL above.