My personal opinion is that given the fact most people can't even see a doctor without scheduling appointments weeks / months out, that the medical licensing system and prescription drug regulatory scheme may at some point violate due process or the right to life. Kinda like how scotus found that the education system violated equal protection in brown. (I note that there is a case out of Texas where the court found doctors to be government actors given certain laws regulating their practice. I actually think they exercise an illegally delegated judicial function by being able to decide who is exempt from drug laws via prescription).

Basically, at some point, people have to be allowed to access medicine, and/or care for, themselves if the system created by the regulatory scheme is causing significant delay in care.

But to your point, the system they want is the system currently used by Kaiser, which is actually three entities... (1) Kaiser hospital, (2) Kaiser medical group, and (3) Kaiser insurance, except they want the government to own (1) and provide (3), and the unions to control (2).

California is proof of this goal. Not only is Kaiser the states preferred insurer, but the seiu controls the labor, and the legislature has passed laws that effectively gives Kaiser an advantage over small hospitals, often putting them out of business — for example, they can put undesirable, non-paying patients in ambulances and dump them at the emergency rooms of small hospitals and then unilaterally determine the rate at which they reimburse those smaller hospitals without any negotiation.

At the point that the state comes to control medicine, they will also control what diseases are real and who lives and who dies.