Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg’s proposal for a public long-term care insurance program could be a promising solution for seniors, according to one prominent expert on Monday. Others also have plans that merit discussion, added Forbes contributor Howard Gleckman.

“Buttigieg has not said how he’d pay for this new program, which is likely to cost several hundred billion dollars over the first 10 years,” Gleckman wrote in a new analysis of candidates’ long-term care plans.

Howard Gleckman

“But insurance is a far better solution than Medicaid or nothing at all, which are the only two options for millions of Americans with long-term care needs and limited resources,” he added.

Buttigieg’s plan, which was announced in November, calls for the development of a long-term services and supports program that would help cover the costs of long-term care for seniors with a high level of need. Under the proposal, benefits would be worth $90 per day for as long as care is needed and would kick in after an income-related waiting period.

“It acknowledges that those costs are beyond the financial capacity of nearly all Americans and that the private market is unwilling to insure against this risk. Yet, it also recognizes the taxpayers will not willingly pick up the full costs,” Gleckman wrote.

Plans from former Vice President Joe Biden and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klochubar both feature different kinds of tax credits, including non-refundable tax credits for reimbursing family caregivers, which would benefit “relatively few families,” Gleckman said.

Proposals from Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren call for universal government long-term care benefits but neither describes “how this would win in any detail” and could be costly, Gleckman notes.

“For instance, they don’t say what level of functional or cognitive limitation would trigger the benefit. Or what services and supports would be included. Or whether the benefit would be capped in any way. But even assuming reasonable limits, such a benefit would be enormously expensive,” Gleckman wrote.

He added that it’s “good news that long-term care finally is getting attention from so many presidential candidates. Now, let the debate over the relative merits of their ideas begin.”