Single-Payer Health Care

[hueylong]

According to the BLS, employment in insurance industry as of April 2017 was 2629.3 thousand, or about 2.6 million. Let's say that health insurance administrators account for roughly 25% of that. That's ~650,000 people who would stand to become unemployed if we adopted single-payer. Why is this treated as such a non-issue? Oftentimes it's not even a part of the conversation, which is bewildering.
 
You can quite easily make the argument that from a utilitarian perspective, 650,000 jobs lost is a small price to pay in order to ensure that everybody has coverage, but that only speaks to the moral component of this question, and does nothing to resolve the political consequences or address the very real instability and uncertainty these people would face.
 
It is true that, from a policy perspective, dealing with the resulting unemployment would likely be fairly straightforward. Many of those displaced could find employment in the expanded Medicare system which would arise, and practically speaking many could be retrained to eventually occupy positions in separate, unrelated fields. I also don't doubt that the type of reform we're discussing is needed and likely the morally correct thing to do. So that's all well and good. Mitigating the political consequences, however, would be anything but straightforward. Progressives would rejoice in their victory, but Democrats would get absolutely clobbered because they would in the eyes of many have basically confirmed the common Republican critique, namely that they don't care all that much about Americans having jobs/don't regard it as a priority. Add in the fact that healthcare is a true political third rail and the electoral consequences look horrifying. The Republican ads, speeches, and campaign slogans would craft themselves. And while it's noble to say that morality should trump politics, many will not share that view.
 
With the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, there has been a corresponding increase in the amount of jobs in the health insurance industry. The reason is obvious--more claims, applications, and purchases, so more employees. And yet instead of this being a reversal of past trends, it's probably more accurate to describe it as an acceleration: This is a sector that has seen consistent growth for decades. So another element of this healthcare debate is that if the Senate GOP does decide to go through with repeal and replace, it will be interesting to see the impact that legislative activity has on employment trends in the health insurance industry both in the immediate short-term and over the coming years.
 
I don't know. Just some thoughts.