The Swiss Model

Switzerland, like all its neighbors in Europe, has a universal health care system. Switzerland’s system, though, is not a government run, socialized, single-payer, health care system. Like the United States, Switzerland has many private insurance companies competing against each other. Unlike the United States, these insurance companies are required to provide health insurance for each citizen, and each citizen must buy health insurance. All people have a choice of which insurance company they would like to be insured under. Under this plan, Swiss people are healthier and happier than their American counterparts. The life expectancy for both men and women, and the infant mortality rate is better in Switzerland than in America. Costs are also lower.

Many have compared the Swiss style of health care to what the U.S. is trying to accomplish. Although, one big thing is missing in Switzerland that President Obama would like: a public option of government run health care. The big question is whether the U.S. should follow Switzerland or devise its own plan including a public option.

Following Switzerland could be a good move for the U.S. Support for a public option is diminishing and taking it away could possibly increase support for health care reform as a whole. A Swiss style of health care has, ironically, gained support from the right-wing Bill O’Reilly of Fox News. The health care bill proposed by the Senate Finance Committee’s Max Baucus, Democrat from Montana, doesn’t even include a public option and amendments to the bill to include the public option have been voted down. As it looks right now, the public option is not going to make it into the final bill and that may be a good thing. It seems that following Switzerland would be the right direction. That is until we look again at what Switzerland is doing.

The Swiss system uses some socialist ideals that might not be suited for America. Switzerland keeps health care costs down by “regulating drug prices,” “fees for lab tests,” and fees for “medical devices.” This policy is somewhat socialist, and definitely not something for America. If a Swiss model is followed and a public option, along with this policy, is left out there wouldn’t be any decrease in the cost of health care. If there is no decrease in costs, is there even any point in trying to reform health care? For this reason – to lower health care costs – the public option is necessary. The whole point of the public option is to compete against insurance companies and bring prices down, along with creating an affordable option for those less fortunate. Another aspect of the Swiss system that Americans might not like is that there is no break in costs for senior citizens. This means no Medicare system. Seniors are already skeptical enough of health care reform fearing that they will lose their precious Medicare. An equal system for all would certainly never pass in America. Also, under the Swiss system, each person pays for insurance themselves with slight help in the form of government subsidies. This means no employer based insurance. Americans are happy being supplied health care from their companies. They don’t have to search themselves, and they get help from their employers. The employer based system certainly cannot go. These problems are only the major ones of all the policies in the Swiss system that would never work in America.

Some may be looking to Switzerland as a model for shaping America’s health care reform, but clearly that is the wrong direction to look. America is a unique country, with very unique values. An English style single-payer health care system could never run in America on account of being too Socialist. A Swiss style system would not work either based on how America is run. Also, as it looks right now, the public option isn’t getting very far. America needs to form its own unique system of health care – with a public option, hopefully – and it is imperative that we do it now. What America will do with health care reform nobody knows, but what is certain is that the Swiss model is the wrong one to follow.

Source: The New York Times