Healthcare and the Presidential Election

Mercer.US consulting services recently issued two articles titled, “Trump Campaign Lists Second-Term Healthcare Priorities” and “What Employers Need to Know About Biden’s Healthcare Polices”.

The key take-way is no one knows what will happen. Much like other campaign rhetoric, solutions to the US health care system are not simple fixes. Additionally, some platform proposals require bi-partisan congressional agreement prior to implementation. It appears Biden’s approach supports building on the Affordable Care Act, while Trump’s approach lacks specifics. Biden explains certain steps he wants to pursue; conversely Trump’s policy categories do not address achievable methodologies.

Neither candidate espouses to eliminate employer sponsored health plans. Biden initially wanted to reduce Medicare eligibility to age 60, but has backed away from this position. Biden does support a public option in addition to the HealthCare.Gov similar to a Medicare model. Both candidates support reducing the price of prescription drugs. Employer health plans have lots of experience when it comes to changes benefiting Medicare and taking away tax advantages to pharmaceutical companies. Simply put – if a hospital is reimbursed less by Medicare, their private pay fees increase accordingly; hence employer sponsored plan cost also increases.

As the baby boomer age wave moves though the economy, health care cost continues to present significant pressure on the GDP. Technology is another driver introducing critical new drugs and medical equipment, though at very high prices. Many health care providers and companies will be called on to provide more services in the future and they have a responsibility to stockholder expectations.

Perhaps the solutions lies with investing and incenting people to adopt healthy lifestyles, rather than looking for efficient ways to treat illness. There is an old adage by some hospital administrators – “We make more money by treating cancer than we do by curing it.” So, while treating unavoidable illness is necessary, having healthier people does significantly reduce total treatment cost. 

Regardless of the election outcome – treating medical conditions and funding the related provider expenses is not going to go away. Employer sponsored plans gained prominence during the 1940s and ever since then we have been looking for ways to mitigate the cost. The election and the ensuing 4 years, will not solve the cost crisis. Hopefully we can ‘bend the curve’ and better manage health care cost.

Victor A. Deksnys
Alliance Partner
Aligned Growth Partners, LLC
victor@deksnys.com
1+415-806-0554

Share this post
Share on linkedin
Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on whatsapp
Share on email
Share on linkedin
Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on whatsapp
Share on email

Related Posts

Open Enrollment & Covid-19

2020 is an interesting year in which to administer Open Enrollment for corporate benefit plans. Typically employees are at work, they generally know open enrollment is looming, and filling out forms or making online elections is the norm. Like life

Expect a Resurgence of Unions Post-pandemic

Everyone wants to know what the world and the world of business will look like once the COVID-19 pandemic abates. Numerous articles have appeared in business publications such as The Atlantic (May  6, 2020), Forbes (April 15, 2020), and The Economist (April 2, 2020) to boldly

NACD Top Director Concerns

Strategy, Workforce Issues Top Director Concerns Post-Crisis, Survey Finds As disruption caused by the pandemic continues, boards and their organizations are moving from a focus on employee health and corporate survival to preparing for recovery and a new normal. To

Thank you!

Your information has been sent successfully.