Administrative efficiency saves less than the link.
Blahous ’18 [Charles; 08-05-2018; “The Fiscal Implausibility of Medicare for All Federal health spending under M4A would grow to exceed all current federal spending as a % of GDP.”; Charles Blahous is the J. Fish and Lillian F. Smith Chair and Senior Research Strategist at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University; Manhattan Institute; https://manhattan.institute/article/the-fiscal-implausibility-of-medicare-for-all \\pairie]
Some have suggested that the study provides evidence for the view that replacing for-profit private health insurance with administratively efficient single-payer insurance will enable more people to receive better benefits for less money. That is incorrect or, at best, an incomplete interpretation. Per above, my study found instead that the potential administrative efficiencies of M4A could only save much less than the induced additional service utilization would cost. It is not the single-payer system itself, but rather cutting payments to hospitals, doctors and nurses that would produce a scenario showing lower national health spending. Without those payment cuts, projections for M4A show not only dramatically higher federal costs but higher national costs as well. Moreover, even with such payment cuts assumed, we still couldn’t say that Americans would get better benefits for less money under M4A, because we simply do not know how many providers would continue to provide services once their income is cut so sharply.