11/ 30/ 2007
Though national elections are still months away, the race is beginning to take shape. Several states hold their primary elections just a few weeks into 2008. On the following pages, we compare the health-care platforms of the candidates who (at press time) are considered frontrunners. As expected, their views on the health-care debate vary greatly. But there are many common provisions included in several of their plans. As you follow the campaigns during the next several months, NFIB wants you to understand the basics behind the discussion.
Universal coverage:
Few disagree on the principle that every American should have access to quality health care, but opinions differ on how to achieve full coverage and pay for it.
Some candidates favor more government involvement through a national health-care plan. Others favor provisions that would mandate that all Americans above a certain income level purchase their own individual health-insurance policy. Still others have proposed plans that would require employers to pay for health care for their employees or pay a fee to cover the cost of those who remain uninsured.
Tax treatment for health-care purchasing:
Many candidates have cited updating the tax code as a way to improve affordability for small-business owners. Offering tax incentives for health-insurance purchases is a solution that is frequently discussed. Some favor incentives to employers who offer coverage. Some favor making the tax benefit available directly to the employee, while others support helping families offset the cost of individual or family coverage.
Consumer-oriented solutions:
Several of the candidates in the presidential race believe health-care reform must include a change in the way Americans view health care--and that starts with becoming a more educated consumer. By educating consumers and making them more involved in their own care, supporters of consumer-driven health plans believe costs can be lowered and that consumers will be more empowered to spend their health-care dollars the way they see fit.
In addition to giving consumers more control, many believe the health-insurance industry should be open to developing more innovative health-care products for consumers. Increasing the size of insurance pools, especially for the small-business market, is one way to encourage competition and drive down costs, candidates say.
Liability reform:
Some candidates have pointed to the litigious atmosphere in our nation today as part of the reason for high health-care costs. Frivolous lawsuits and large jury awards drive up malpractice costs, which have led to critical shortages of specialists, such as obstetricians and surgeons, and have forced emergency rooms to drastically cut back the number of available doctors. Ultimately this lawsuit abuse drives up the cost of care for all Americans.
Portability:
According to the Labor Department, Americans will have an average of 10 jobs before age 36--a clear indication of why we must have a health-care marketplace that provides a transient workforce with the options and freedom to make good entrepreneurial decisions. Unfortunately, what we have today is an inflexible health-insurance system that doesn't fit the needs of our ever-changing workforce.
Rather than lock entrepreneurs into their jobs, it is time to create a climate that fosters health-care security--across all phases of life. Entre- preneurs have become the nation's economic backbone by being flexible, adaptable and thinking outside the box. It is essential to apply that thinking to our health-insurance framework in order to continue to grow the next generation of entrepreneurs.
Many factors influence the person voters choose for president. But health care is one issue that should top all lists. It's not only a problem for small-business owners, but our entire country. The health of our economy depends on finding a solution.
