NEW YORK, Nov. 20, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- The leading Republican and Democratic presidential candidates are proposing two very different approaches to reform the U.S. healthcare system, according to an analysis released today by PricewaterhouseCoopers' Health Research Institute. Democrats promise broader and more immediate changes to decrease costs, improve quality and mandate coverage for the uninsured. The Republicans have similar goals but less detailed proposals that mostly rely on tax credits or incentives for individuals to purchase insurance without federal mandates.
Both parties' plans will expand the federal government's role in health care, drive growth in the private insurance market and affect consumer pocketbooks and business bottom lines in significantly different ways.
PricewaterhouseCoopers' report, entitled Beyond the Sound Bite: November 2007 Review of Presidential Candidates' Proposals for Health Reform, offers an independent, nonpartisan analysis of candidates' health proposals and how they would impact individuals, employers and the sectors within the health industries. A full copy of the report can be downloaded from http://www.pwc.com/healthreform.
"Health care will change in the next administration, and the implications will be enormous," said Sandy Lutz, managing director, PricewaterhouseCoopers' Health Research Institute. "But this is an incredibly complex issue. No plan is perfect and there will be trade-offs. The Republicans have chosen a different set of trade offs than the Democrats have. With this report, we sought to better understand the plans so that all stakeholders can plan accordingly and to urge the candidates to give more than sound bites."
Changes in direction and policy could dramatically alter the government's role and clout. The government's share of health spending has been steadily increasing, and it now pays for just less than 50 percent of all health care in the U.S. Current estimates indicate that more than half of all health spending will be government funded by 2017, but it may be even earlier, due to expansions of government programs. For example, spending an estimated $100 billion to expand universal access would make 2011 the year when the U.S. will have a primarily government funded health care system.
While all the candidates have formal health proposals, they differ in how much they emphasize the issue on the campaign trail. A quantitative survey of candidates' public remarks found that Senators Clinton, Edwards and Obama and Governor Romney are speaking about health care issues about twice as frequently as the other candidates.
Other key findings of the report are:
* Both parties' approaches may have far reaching consequences for the insurance market with a huge boost to the individual market and some of the first cracks at the historically employer-dominated insurance system. Republicans want to grow the individual market through tax incentives and deemphasize the employer sponsored insurance market, while Democrats want to mandate individual and employer insurance. Either approach is likely to expand the existing private insurance market, which has seen minimal growth recently despite the introduction of tax-advantaged health savings accounts. * All of the candidates are talking about decreasing cost and improving quality. Many health industry leaders believe that programs and tools such as comparative effectiveness, information technology and wellness programs are the best hope for improving the efficiency of our current system. However, none of the candidates wants to mandate the use of information technology, and only Senators Obama and Clinton have proposed additional government funding to accelerate adoption by hospitals. * Democratic candidates' proposals to control the cost of drugs, such as direct negotiation for Medicare drugs, re-importation and bio- generics, have the potential to significantly affect the pharmaceutical industry, which currently accounts for about 10 percent of overall health care spending. However, taking a cue from the 1994 health reform debate, no candidate is talking seriously about reimbursement changes to hospitals and doctors. * All of the candidates have proposed tax law changes to pay for care of the uninsured, equalize the tax benefits of buying health insurance coverage or encourage consumers to purchase health care more appropriate to their needs. The crux of their differences is the candidates' positions on the Bush tax cuts set to expire in 2010: The Republicans want to extend the tax cuts while the Democrats want to preserve some of them, and spend the rest on health care.
"The Democrats are talking and writing about health care far more than the Republican candidates. But more talk does not necessarily mean more substance. There are still many unanswered questions about the downstream impact of each plan," added Lutz. "Both parties have similar cost, quality and access goals, but different paths for achieving them. We think all stakeholders of healthcare, and certainly all our clients, need to know how those differences will affect them."
The report includes analysis of candidates' positions by a team of health industry specialists and policy analysts from PricewaterhouseCoopers and interviews with policymakers and health industry executives. The report covered candidates who averaged at least 10 percent in national polls for their party's nomination: U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton (D); former U.S. Senator John Edwards (D); former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R); U.S. Senator John McCain (R); U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D); former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (R); and former U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (R).
Beyond the Sound Bite: November 2007 Review of Presidential Candidates' Proposals for Health Reform is PricewaterhouseCoopers' second research report focused directly upon presidential health policy. President Bush's Second Term: Prescribing private solutions for the nation's healthcare problems, published in November 2004, detailed President Bush's key health policy proposals, challenges and opportunities for his second term.
About the PricewaterhouseCoopers Health Research Institute
PricewaterhouseCoopers Health Research Institute (http://www.pwc.com/hri) provides new intelligence, perspective and analysis on trends affecting all health-related industries, including health care providers, pharmaceuticals, health and life sciences and payers. The Institute is part of PricewaterhouseCoopers' larger initiative for the health-related industries that brings together expertise and allows collaboration across all sectors in the health continuum.
About PricewaterhouseCoopers Health Industries Group
Committed to the transformation of healthcare through innovation, collaboration and thought leadership, PricewaterhouseCoopers Health Industries Group (http://www.pwc.com/healthindustries) offers industry and technical expertise across all health-related industries, including providers and payers, health sciences, biotech/medical devices, pharmaceutical and employer practices.
About PricewaterhouseCoopers
PricewaterhouseCoopers provides industry-focused assurance, tax and advisory services to build public trust and enhance value for its clients and their stakeholders. More than 146,000 people in 150 countries across our network share their thinking, experience and solutions to develop fresh perspectives and practical advice.
"PricewaterhouseCoopers" refers to the network of member firms of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each of which is a separate and independent legal entity.