Not so much, at least at most places. You are more often put in a less desirable pile at some places, where you are held to a higher standard -- needing to show improvement above and beyond what would have gotten you in if you only held off a year before applying. Every year someone on the pre-allo or reapplicant board plays up the suggestion that applying over and over again shows real dedication. It just doesn't work that way. Adcoms want applicants with few to no blemishes. When you are digging through a pile of 10,000 applications, it only takes a small red flag for the adcom to throw out the file. And having been found not up to muster in a prior year is such a flag in some cases. Are they going to take the unblemished applicant, or the one they didn't want last year? For them to take the latter, the reapplicant has to wow them with improvements. So it's a higher standard. You don't want to put yourself in this position if you can tell going in that it's a strong possibility.
If, however, you find yourself in this position, you need to really show pretty substantial improvements -- higher GPA, higher MCAT, more ECs -- often more than you can do between the time you get rejected and the time the next application cycle opens. But for the OP, I think the answer is that if s/he thinks rejection is a substantial possibility, then holding off a year and getting his/her ducks in order is a good idea. Med schools reward those who take the time to get it right, and are hardest on those who rush things. Nothing results in more rejections in the med school application process than rushing things.
