Contents
After voting yes to the 13th AHV pension, the SP wants to land the next coup. Despite similar signs, there is one crucial difference: the counter-proposal takes up the main concern of the initiative, says SP Federal Councilor Elisabeth Baume-Schneider. But her party distrusts the request.
For the second time in just a few months, SP Federal Councilor Elisabeth Baume-Schneider is running against her own party. In the “voting arena”, the Health Minister explains why she rejects the SP’s premium relief initiative: She sees that the premium burden is high for many families. But: “The billions don’t come from heaven.” In addition, the initiative does not solve the problem of rising healthcare costs.
With the premium relief initiative, the SP wants to cap health insurance premiums: in the future, an insured person should have to spend a maximum of ten percent of their disposable income on premiums. The federal government and cantons should cover the rest with additional premium reductions. The federal government and parliament reject the initiative. They have drawn up a counter-proposal that requires the cantons to make a minimum contribution to the premium reduction.
Does the middle class suffer or benefit?
SP co-president Mattea Meyer says the constant increase in health insurance premiums worries her: “It can’t be the case that a family of four has to pay 15,000 francs in health insurance premiums per year.” We finally need a premium cap.
FDP President Thierry Burkart warns against this very cap: The premium relief initiative is a “redistribution initiative” that means that many middle-class people have to pay more. It is impossible to cover the costs – according to federal estimates they are in the billions – via the regular federal budget: “There will be tax increases.” Lucerne’s health director Michaela Tschuor also warns about the costs. She also sees federalism in danger.
There will be tax increases.
Meanwhile, the initiators point out that the initiative will not result in any additional costs for health care. The aim is simply to “shift some of the premium burden away from households,” says Meyer. And that goes to the federal government and cantons, which could act.
Counterproposal makes cantons responsible
Daniel Lampart, chief economist of the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions, is also fighting for the initiative on Meyer’s side: “Many families no longer know how they are going to pay for all of this.” The initiative relieves those who urgently need it. Philippe Luchsinger, President of the Association of General Practitioners and Pediatricians, even warns of a supply emergency: “Almost 20 percent of the population does not go to the doctor for financial reasons.”
Many families no longer know how they are going to pay for all of this.
Precisely because of the financial hardships, the problem of rising health care costs must be tackled at its roots, counters SP Federal Councilor Baume-Schneider. The counterproposal would give the cantons incentives to reduce costs. At the same time, the main concern of the initiative will be taken up.
In the first SRG survey – carried out by the GFS Bern research institute – a majority of 56 percent of respondents stated that they would definitely or rather want to put a yes to the SP initiative in the ballot box on June 9th. However, there is still a long way to go for the SP’s second vote victory – the campaigns are only just getting started.
It cannot be ruled out that the proposal could ultimately be doomed by the majority of estates. There are already major differences between the language regions. The survey shows that approval in Latin-speaking Switzerland is currently significantly higher than in German-speaking Switzerland.