November 2008
Two prescriptions for America’s ills
McCain and Obama offer conflicting health plans. Here’s how you’d fare
Illustration by Dean Gorissen
Politics aside, Americans overwhelmingly agree that our health-care system needs emergency care. It costs too much, is riddled
with waste, and completely leaves out about 46 million people.
Changing the system has been a top issue in the 2008 presidential race, and both major-party candidates promise dramatic reforms for people not on Medicare.
But their approaches are radically different. Sen. John McCain, Republican of Arizona, would create a deregulated national insurance market, expand individual coverage, and rely on competition to drive costs down. People with serious health problems could join government-subsidized high-risk pools like those that many states run today. Sen. Barack Obama, on the other hand, would set national standards to plug coverage gaps, require that all children be covered, stop insurers from turning sick people away, and subsidize lower-income families’ premiums. The Illinois Democrat’s aim is to spread the risk so broadly that everyone will be able to afford good insurance.
Unfortunately, both plans lack key details. (See How the candidates’ proposals compare.) "There’s not a lot of advantage in being too detailed, because it just gives people something to shoot at," says Gary Claxton of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health research group. Still, we analyzed what could happen to five American households under McCain and under Obama. The cases aren’t statistically representative but do highlight the stark contrasts between the plans.
Changing the system has been a top issue in the 2008 presidential race, and both major-party candidates promise dramatic reforms for people not on Medicare.
But their approaches are radically different. Sen. John McCain, Republican of Arizona, would create a deregulated national insurance market, expand individual coverage, and rely on competition to drive costs down. People with serious health problems could join government-subsidized high-risk pools like those that many states run today. Sen. Barack Obama, on the other hand, would set national standards to plug coverage gaps, require that all children be covered, stop insurers from turning sick people away, and subsidize lower-income families’ premiums. The Illinois Democrat’s aim is to spread the risk so broadly that everyone will be able to afford good insurance.
Unfortunately, both plans lack key details. (See How the candidates’ proposals compare.) "There’s not a lot of advantage in being too detailed, because it just gives people something to shoot at," says Gary Claxton of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health research group. Still, we analyzed what could happen to five American households under McCain and under Obama. The cases aren’t statistically representative but do highlight the stark contrasts between the plans.
