This is the accessible text file for CG Presentation number GAO-08- 338CG entitled 'Fiscal and Health Care Challenges' which was released on December 6, 2007. United States Government Accountability Office: GAO: Fiscal and Health Care Challenges: The Honorable David M. Walker: Comptroller General of the United States: National Conference on Health Care Consumerism: December 5, 2007: GAO-08-338CG: Composition of Federal Spending: [See PDF for image] - graphic text: There are three pie charts, containing the following compositions of spending by category: Year: 1966; Defense: 43%; Social Security: 15%; Medicare and Medicaid: 1%; Net Interest: 7%; All Other: 34%. Year: 1986; Defense: 28%; Social Security: 20%; Medicare and Medicaid: 10%; Net Interest: 14%; All Other: 29%. Year: 2006; Defense: 20%; Social Security: 21%; Medicare and Medicaid: 19%; Net Interest: 9%; All Other: 32%. Source: Office of Management and Budget and the Department of the Treasury. Note: Numbers may not add to 100 percent due to rounding. [End of figure] Table: Major Fiscal Exposures ($ trillions): Explicit liabilities (Publicly held debt, Military & civilian pensions & retiree health, Other): 2000: $6.9; 2006: $10.4; Percent increase: 52. Commitments & contingencies (e.g., PBGC, undelivered orders): 2000: 0.5; 2006: 1.3 Percent increase: 140. Implicit exposures: 2000: 13.0; Future Social Security benefits: 3.8; Future Medicare Part A benefits: 2.7; Future Medicare Part B benefits: 6.5; Future Medicare Part D benefits: [Empty]. 2006: 38.8; Future Social Security benefits: 6.4; Future Medicare Part A benefits: 11.3; Future Medicare Part B benefits: 13.1; Future Medicare Part D benefits: 7.9. Percent increase: 197. Total, 2000: $20.4; Total, 2006: $50.5; Percent increase: 147. Source: 2000 and 2006 Financial Report of the United States Government. Note: Totals and percent increases may not add due to rounding.Estimates for Social Security and Medicare are at present value as of January 1 of each year and all other data are as of September 30. [End of table] Table: How Big is Our Growing Fiscal Burden? This fiscal burden can be translated and compared as follows: Total major fiscal exposures: $50.5 trillion; Total household net worth[1]: $53.3 trillion; Burden/Net worth ratio: 95 percent. Burden[2]: Per person: $170,000; Per full-time worker: $400,000; Per household: $440,000. Income: Median household income[3]: $46,326; Disposable personal income per capita[4]: $31,519. Source: GAO analysis. Notes: (1) Federal Reserve Board, Flow of Funds Accounts, Table B.100, 2006:Q2 (Sept. 19, 2006); (2) Burdens are calculated using estimated total U.S. population as of 9/30/06, from the U.S. Census Bureau; full- time workers reported by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, in NIPA table 6.5D (Aug. 2, 2006); and households reported by the U.S. Census Bureau, in Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005(Aug. 2006); (3) U.S. Census Bureau, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005(Aug. 2006); and (4) Bureau of Economic Analysis, Personal Income and Outlays: October 2006, table 2, (Nov. 30, 2006). [End of table] Potential Fiscal Outcomes Under Baseline Extended (January 2001); Revenues and Composition of Spending as a Share of GDP. [See PDF for image] - graphic text. This is a line/stacked bar graph with one line (revenue) and four stacked bars containing four spending items (Net interest, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and All other spending). The vertical axis represents Percent of GDP and the horizontal axis represents fiscal years 2005, 2015[a], 2030[a], and 2040[a]. The following data is depicted: 2005: Net interest: 0.8%; Social Security: 4.3%; Medicare & Medicaid: 3.7%; All other spending: 7.994%; Revenue: 20.3%. 2015[A]: Net interest: [Empty]; Social Security: 5.1%; Medicare & Medicaid: 4.9%; All other spending: 5.574%; Revenue: 20.4%. 2030[A]: Net interest: [Empty]; Social Security: 6.6%; Medicare & Medicaid: 9.4%; All other spending: 3.991%; Revenue: 20.4%. 2040[A]: Net interest: [Empty]; Social Security: 6.7%; Medicare & Medicaid: 9%; All other spending: 4.361%; Revenue: 20.4%. Source: GAO’s January 2001 analysis. [a] All other spending is net of offsetting interest receipts. [End of graph] Potential Fiscal Outcomes Under Alternative Simulation; Revenues and Composition of Spending as a Share of GDP: [See PDF for image] - graphic text. This is a line/stacked bar graph with one line (revenue) and four stacked bars containing four spending items (Net interest, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and All other spending). The vertical axis represents Percent of GDP and the horizontal axis represents fiscal years 2006, 2015, 2030, and 2040. The following data is depicted: Fiscal year 2006: Net interest: 1.7%; Social Security: 4.2%; Medicare & Medicaid: 3.9%; All other spending: 10.6%; Revenue: 18.4%. Fiscal year 2015: Net interest: 2.3%; Social Security: 4.8%; Medicare & Medicaid: 5.7%; All other spending: 9.6%; Revenue: 18%. Fiscal year 2030: Net interest: 5.8%; Social Security: 6.6%; Medicare & Medicaid: 8.8%; All other spending: 9.6%; Revenue: 18.6%. Fiscal year 2040: Net interest: 11.6%; Social Security: 7.2%; Medicare & Medicaid: 10.8%; All other spending: 9.6%; Revenue: 18.6%. Source: GAO’s August 2007 analysis. Notes: AMT exemption amount is retained at the 2006 level through 2017 and expiring tax provisions are extended. After 2017, revenue as a share of GDP returns to its historical level of 18.3 percent of GDP plus expected revenues from deferred taxes, i.e. taxes on withdrawals from retirement accounts. Medicare spending is based on the Trustees April 2007 projections adjusted for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services alternative assumption that physician payments are not reduced as specified under current law. [End of graph] Growth in Spending for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid Expected to Outpace Economic Growth: [See PDF for image] This image is a bar graph depicting Growth in Spending for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid Expected to Outpace Economic Growth. The vertical axis of the graph represents growth in constant dollars, 2007-2032 in percentage from 0 to 150. The horizontal axis represents spending growth in the four areas. The following data is depicted: Growth in Constant dollars, 2007-2032: GDP: 71%; Social Security Spending: 127%; Medicaid Spending: 224%; Medicare Spending: 235%. Source: GAO analysis based on data from the Office of the Chief Actuary, Social Security Administration; Office of the Actuary,Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; and the Congressional Budget Office. Notes: Social Security and Medicare projections based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2007 Trustees’ Reports. Medicaid projections based on CBO’s August 2007 short-term Medicaid estimates and CBO’s December 2005 long-term Medicaid projections under mid-range assumptions. [End of graph] Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid Spending as a Percent of GDP: [See PDF for image] - graphic text. This is a line graph with three stacked lines (Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare). The vertical axis represents Percent of GDP and the horizontal axis represents fiscal years 2000 through 2080. The following data is depicted: 2000: Social Security: 4.229; Medicaid: 1.23; Medicare: 2.277. 2001: Social Security: 4.334; Medicaid: 1.322; Medicare: 2.433. 2002: Social Security: 4.409; Medicaid: 1.44; Medicare: 2.523. 2003: Social Security: 4.371; Medicaid: 1.501; Medicare: 2.56. 2004: Social Security: 4.283; Medicaid: 1.516; Medicare: 2.629. 2005: Social Security: 4.254; Medicaid: 1.457; Medicare: 2.7. 2006: Social Security: 4.28; Medicaid: 1.383; Medicare: 3.072. 2007: Social Security: 4.29; Medicaid: 1.401; Medicare: 3.185. 2008: Social Security: 4.24; Medicaid: 1.449; Medicare: 3.255. 2009: Social Security: 4.26; Medicaid: 1.490; Medicare: 3.333. 2010: Social Security: 4.32; Medicaid: 1.531; Medicare: 3.414. 2011: Social Security: 4.36; Medicaid: 1.578; Medicare: 3.49. 2012: Social Security: 4.44; Medicaid: 1.630; Medicare: 3.588. 2013: Social Security: 4.54; Medicaid: 1.683; Medicare: 3.694. 2014: Social Security: 4.65; Medicaid: 1.739; Medicare: 3.806. 2015: Social Security: 4.76; Medicaid: 1.799; Medicare: 3.918. 2016: Social Security: 4.86; Medicaid: 1.864; Medicare: 4.044. 2017: Social Security: 4.976; Medicaid: 1.930 Medicare: 4.183. 2018: Social Security: 5.08; Medicaid: 2.2; Medicare: 4.331. 2019: Social Security: 5.2; Medicaid: 2.2; Medicare: 4.483. 2020: Social Security: 5.31; Medicaid: 2.3; Medicare: 4.642. 2021: Social Security: 5.41; Medicaid: 2.3; Medicare: 4.809. 2022: Social Security: 5.22; Medicaid: 2.4; Medicare: 4.988. 2023: Social Security: 5.61; Medicaid: 2.4; Medicare: 5.173. 2024: Social Security: 5.71; Medicaid: 2.5; Medicare: 5.359. 2025: Social Security: 5.8; Medicaid: 2.6; Medicare: 5.547. 2026: Social Security: 5.89; Medicaid: 2.6; Medicare: 5.739. 2027: Social Security: 5.97; Medicaid: 2.7; Medicare: 5.935. 2028: Social Security: 6.05; Medicaid: 2.7; Medicare: 6.131. 2029: Social Security: 6.12; Medicaid: 2.8; Medicare: 6.322. 2030: Social Security: 6.17; Medicaid: 2.8; Medicare: 6.505. 2031: Social Security: 6.22; Medicaid: 2.9; Medicare: 6.682. 2032: Social Security: 6.27; Medicaid: 2.9; Medicare: 6.851. 2033: Social Security: 6.3; Medicaid: 3; Medicare: 7.017. 2034: Social Security: 6.32; Medicaid: 3.1; Medicare: 7.279. 2035: Social Security: 6.33; Medicaid: 3.1; Medicare: 7.34. 2036: Social Security: 6.34; Medicaid: 3.2; Medicare: 7.498. 2037: Social Security: 6.34; Medicaid: 3.3; Medicare: 7.643. 2038: Social Security: 6.34; Medicaid: 3.3; Medicare: 7.774. 2039: Social Security: 6.33; Medicaid: 3.4; Medicare: 7.894. 2040: Social Security: 6.31; Medicaid: 3.4; Medicare: 8.01. 2041: Social Security: 6.3; Medicaid: 3.5; Medicare: 8.121. 2042: Social Security: 6.28; Medicaid: 3.6; Medicare: 8.229. 2043: Social Security: 6.27; Medicaid: 3.6; Medicare: 8.334. 2044: Social Security: 6.25; Medicaid: 3.7; Medicare: 8.437. 2045: Social Security: 6.24; Medicaid: 3.7; Medicare: 8.54. 2046: Social Security: 6.23; Medicaid: 3.8; Medicare: 8.64. 2047: Social Security: 6.22; Medicaid: 3.8; Medicare: 8.737. 2048: Social Security: 6.21; Medicaid: 3.9; Medicare: 8.829. 2049: Social Security: 6.2; Medicaid: 3.9; Medicare: 8.916. 2050: Social Security: 6.2; Medicaid: 4; Medicare: 9.002. 2051: Social Security: 6.19; Medicaid: 4.063; Medicare: 9.008. 2052: Social Security: 6.19; Medicaid: 4.127; Medicare: 9.172. 2053: Social Security: 6.19; Medicaid: 4.192; Medicare: 9.256. 2054: Social Security: 6.2; Medicaid: 4.258; Medicare: 9.344. 2055: Social Security: 6.2; Medicaid: 4.325; Medicare: 9.439. 2056: Social Security: 6.21; Medicaid: 4.393; Medicare: 9.538. 2057: Social Security: 6.21; Medicaid: 4.462; Medicare: 9.634. 2058: Social Security: 6.22; Medicaid: 4.533; Medicare: 9.728. 2059: Social Security: 6.23; Medicaid: 4.604; Medicare: 9.82. 2060: Social Security: 6.23; Medicaid: 4.676; Medicare: 9.91. 2061: Social Security: 6.24; Medicaid: 4.75; Medicare: 10. 2062: Social Security: 6.24; Medicaid: 4.825; Medicare: 10.087. 2063: Social Security: 6.24; Medicaid: 4.901; Medicare: 10.175. 2064: Social Security: 6.25; Medicaid: 4.978; Medicare: 10.262. 2065: Social Security: 6.25; Medicaid: 5.056; Medicare: 10.349. 2066: Social Security: 6.25; Medicaid: 5.136; Medicare: 10.429. 2067: Social Security: 6.25; Medicaid: 5.217; Medicare: 10.502. 2068: Social Security: 6.26; Medicaid: 5.299; Medicare: 10.574. 2069: Social Security: 6.26; Medicaid: 5.383; Medicare: 10.648. 2070: Social Security: 6.26; Medicaid: 5.467; Medicare: 10.718. 2071: Social Security: 6.27; Medicaid: 5.553; Medicare: 10.784. 2072: Social Security: 6.27; Medicaid: 5.641; Medicare: 10.845. 2073: Social Security: 6.27; Medicaid: 5.73; Medicare: 10.906. 2074: Social Security: 6.27; Medicaid: 5.82; Medicare: 10.964. 2075: Social Security: 6.27; Medicaid: 5.912; Medicare: 11.022. 2076: Social Security: 6.27; Medicaid: 6.005; Medicare: 11.079. 2077: Social Security: 6.27; Medicaid: 6.099; Medicare: 11.134. 2078: Social Security: 6.28; Medicaid: 6.195; Medicare: 11.187. 2079: Social Security: 6.28; Medicaid: 6.293; Medicare: 11.239. 2080: Social Security: 6.28; Medicaid: 6.392; Medicare: 11.29. [End of graph] Source: GAO analysis based on data from the Office of the Chief Actuary, Social Security Administration, Office of the Actuary, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and the Congressional Budget Office. Notes: Social Security and Medicare projections based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2006 Trustees’ Reports. Medicaid projections based on CBO’s August 2006 short-term Medicaid estimates and CBO’s December 2005 long-term Medicaid projections under mid-range assumptions. [End of graph] Revenue Loss Estimates for the Largest Tax Expenditures Reported for Fiscal Year 2006: [See PDF for image] The figure is a stacked bar graph depicting the Revenue Loss Estimates for the Largest Tax Expenditures Reported for Fiscal Year 2006. The vertical axis of the graph represents revenue loss estimates (dollars in billions). The horizontal axis of the graph represents five categories of tax expenditures. The following data is depicted: Exclusion of employer contributions for medical insurance premiums and medical care: Treasury estimated income tax revenue losses: $125; Approximate payroll tax revenue losses: $62.5; Total: $187.5. Net exclusion of employer-sponsored pension contributions and earnings: Treasury estimated income tax revenue losses: $89.8[A]. Deductibility of mortgage interest on owner-occupied homes: Treasury estimated income tax revenue losses: $68.3. Capital gains (except agriculture, timber, iron ore, and coal): Treasury estimated income tax revenue losses: $48.6. Deductibility of nonbusiness state and local taxes other than on owner- occupied homes: Treasury estimated income tax revenue losses: $43.1. Source: GAO analysis of OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government,Fiscal Year 2008. [a] The value of employer-provided health insurance is excluded from Medicare and Social Security payroll taxes. Some researchers have estimated that payroll tax revenue losses amounted to more than half of the income tax revenue losses in 2004, and we use this estimate for 2006. The research we are aware of dealt only with health care, therefore the 50 percent figure may not apply to other items that are excluded from otherwise applicable income and payroll taxes. [End of graph] Current Fiscal Policy Is Unsustainable: * The “Status Quo”is Not an Option: - We face large and growing structural deficits largely due to known demographic trends and rising health care costs. - GAO’s simulations show that balancing the budget in 2040 could require actions as large as: * Cutting total federal spending by 60 percent or; * Raising federal taxes to 2 times today's level. * Faster Economic Growth Can Help, but It Cannot Solve the Problem: - Closing the current long-term fiscal gap based on reasonable assumptions would require real average annual economic growth in the double digit range every year for the next 75 years. - During the 1990s, the economy grew at an average 3.2 percent per year. - As a result, we cannot simply grow our way out of this problem. Tough choices will be required. The Way Forward: A Three-Pronged Approach: 1. Improve Financial Reporting, Public Education, and Performance Metrics. 2. Strengthen Budget and Legislative Processes and Controls. 3. Fundamentally Reexamine & Transform for the 21st Century (i.e., entitlement programs, other spending, and tax policy). Solutions Require Active Involvement from both the Executive and Legislative Branches. 21st Century Challenges Report: * Provides background, framework, and questions to assist in reexamining the base; * Covers entitlements & other mandatory spending, discretionary spending, and tax policies and programs; * Based on GAO’s work for the Congress. Source: GAO. Twelve Reexamination Areas: Mission Areas: * Defense; * Education & Employment; * Financial Regulation & Housing; * Health Care; * Homeland Security; * International Affairs; * Natural Resources, Energy & Environment; * Retirement & Disability; * Science & Technology; * Transportation. Crosscutting Areas: * Improving Governance; * Reexamining the Tax System. Illustrative 21st Century Questions: Health Care: * How can we make our current Medicare and Medicaid programs sustainable? For example, should the eligibility requirements (e.g., age, income requirements) for these programs be modified? * How can we perform a systematic reexamination of our current health care system? For example, could public and private entities work jointly to establish formal reexamination processes that would (1) define and update as needed a minimum core of essential health care services, (2) ensure that all Americans have access to the defined minimum core services, (3) allocate responsibility for financing these services among such entities as government, employers, and individuals, and (4) provide the opportunity for individuals to obtain additional services at their discretion and cost? Key Dates Highlight Long Term Challenges of the Medicare Program: Date: 2007; Event: Medicare Part A outlays exceed cash income. Date: 2007; Event: Estimated trigger date for “Medicare funding warning.” Date: 2013; Event: Projected date that annual “general revenue funding” for Part B will exceed 45 percent of total Medicare outlays. Date: 2019; Part A trust fund exhausted, annual income sufficient to pay about 80% of promised Part A benefits. Source: 2007 Annual Report of The Boards of Trustees of The Federal Hospital Insurance and Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Funds(Washington, DC, April 2007). [End of table] Health Care Spending by Source of Funds, 1965-2005: [See PDF for image] This image contains three pie-charts that depict the following data: Health Care Spending by Source of Funds, 1965: Out-of-Pocket: 43%; Private Health Insurance: 24%; Medicare: 0; Federal and state Medicaid: 0; Other Public: 25%; Other Private: 8%. Health Care Spending by Source of Funds, 1985: Out-of-Pocket: 22%; Private Health Insurance: 30%; Medicare: 16%; Federal and state Medicaid: 9%; Other Public: 15%; Other Private: 8%. Health Care Spending by Source of Funds, 2005: Out-of-Pocket: 13%; Private Health Insurance: 35%; Medicare: 17%; Federal and state Medicaid: 16%; Other Public: 12%; Other Private: 7%. Source: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary. Notes: The most current data available on health care spending are for 2005. Out-of-pocket spending includes direct spending by consumers on coinsurance, deductibles, and any amounts not covered by insurance. Out- of-pocket premiums paid by individuals are not counted here but are counted as part of Private Health Insurance. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. [End of image] Growth in Health Care Spending Health Care Spending as a Percentage of GDP: [See PDF for image] This figure is a bar graph depicting Growth in Health Care Spending Health Care Spending as a Percentage of GDP for five specific years. The vertical axis of the graph represents percent from 0 to 25. The horizontal axis of the graph represents years 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2015. The following data is depicted: Year: 1975; National health expenditures as a percent of GDP: 8.1%. Year: 1985; National health expenditures as a percent of GDP: 10.4%. Year: 1995; National health expenditures as a percent of GDP: 13.7%. Year: 2005; National health expenditures as a percent of GDP: 16.0%. Year: 2015; National health expenditures as a percent of GDP: 19.2%. Source: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary. Notes: The most current data available on health care spending are for 2005. The figure for 2015 is projected. [End of graph] Cumulative Growth in Health Care Spending Per Capita, Medical Inflation, GDP Per Capita, and General Inflation, 2000-2005: [See PDF for image] The figure is a line graph depicting the Cumulative Growth in Health Care Spending Per Capita, Medical Inflation, GDP Per Capita, and General Inflation, 2000-2005. The vertical axis of the graph represents cumulative percentage from 0 to 50. The horizontal axis of the graph represents years from 2000 to 2005. The following data is depicted: Year: 2000; Health care spending per capita: 0; CPI-Medical: 0; GDP per capita: 0; CPI-Urban consumers: 0. Year: 2001; Health care spending per capita: 7.47; CPI-Medical: 4.6; GDP per capita: 2.08; CPI-Urban consumers: 2.85. Year: 2002; Health care spending per capita: 16.05; CPI-Medical: 9.51; GDP per capita: 4.5; CPI-Urban consumers: 4.47. Year: 2003; Health care spending per capita: 24.26; CPI-Medical: 13.92; GDP per capita: 8.32; CPI-Urban consumers: 6.85. Year: 2004; Health care spending per capita: 31.98; CPI-Medical: 18.9; GDP per capita: 14.64; CPI-Urban consumers: 9.7. Year: 2005; Health care spending per capita: 39.81; CPI-Medical: 23.93; GDP per capita: 20.77; CPI-Urban consumers: 13.41. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Note: The most current data available on health care spending per capita are for 2005. [End of figure] Growth in Health Care Spending: U.S Compared to Other OECD Countries, 2005: [See PDF for image] This figure is a plotted point graph depicting Growth in Health Care Spending: U.S Compared to Other OECD Countries, 2005. The vertical axis of the graph represents percent of GDP spent on health care. The horizontal axis of the graph represents health care spending per capita (USD $PPP). The following data is depicted: There are twenty-nine plotted points on the graph, with the following six specifically depicted: Country: Turkey; Percent of GDP spent on health care: 7.6% and $586. Country: South Korea; Percent of GDP spent on health care: 6.0% and $1,318. Country: Switzerland; Percent of GDP spent on health care: 11.6% and $4,177. Country: Norway; Percent of GDP spent on health care: 9.1% and $4,364. Country: Luxembourg; Percent of GDP spent on health care: 7.9% and $5,563. Country: United States; Percent of GDP spent on health care: 15.3% and $6,401. Source: OECD Health Data, 2007. Notes: All of the data on per capita spending and GDP have been translated into U.S. dollar equivalents, with exchange rates based on purchasing power parities (PPPs) of the national currencies. Data for Australia, Hungary, Japan, and the Netherlands are for 2004. [End of graph] Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits, 2000-2007: [See PDF for image] The figure is a series vertical bars depicting the percentage of firms offering health benefits, 2000-2007. The following data is depicted: Year: 2000; Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits: 69%. Year: 2001; Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits: 68%. Year: 2002; Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits: 66%. Year: 2003; Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits: 66%. Year: 2004; Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits: 63%. Year: 2005; Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits: 60%. Year: 2006; Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits: 61%. Year: 2007; Percentage of Firms Offering Health Benefits: 60%. Source: Kaiser/HRET Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Benefits. Notes: The survey results are based on a sample of 3,159 firms and include both small firms (3-199 workers) and large firms (200+ workers). While the year to year changes in the percentage of firms offering benefits have not been statistically significant, the cumulative effect has been a large and statistically significant change over this 7 year period. [End of figure] Change in Average Monthly Worker Premium Contributions Paid by Covered Workers for Single and Family Coverage, 2000 to 2007: [See PDF for image] This figure is a vertical bar graph depicting the change in average monthly worker premium contributions paid by covered workers for single and family coverage, 2000 to 2007. The vertical axis of the graph represents dollars from 0 to 300. The horizontal axis of the graph represents single and family coverage for the years 2000 and 2007. The following data is depicted: Year: 2000; Single Coverage: $28; Family Coverage: $58. Year: 2007; Single Coverage: $135; Family Coverage: $273. Source: Kaiser/HRET Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Benefits. Note: Premium contributions are reported in nominal dollars. [End of graph] Growth in Health Insurance Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance: Cumulative Growth in Health Insurance Premiums, Overall Inflation, and Workers’ Earnings, 2000-2007: [See PDF for image] The figure is a line graph with three lines depicting the growth in health insurance premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance: cumulative growth in health insurance premiums, overall inflation, and workers’ earnings, 2000-2007. The vertical axis of the graph represents cumulative percentage from 0 to 120. The horizontal axis of the graph represents years 2000 through 2007. The following data is depicted: Growth in Health Insurance Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance: 2000; Health insurance premiums: 0; Workers' earnings: 0; Overall inflation: 0. Growth in Health Insurance Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance, 2001; Health insurance premiums: 20; Workers' earnings: 8.1; Overall inflation: 6.5. Growth in Health Insurance Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance, 2002; Health insurance premiums: 35.5; Workers' earnings: 10.9; Overall inflation: 8.3. Growth in Health Insurance Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance, 2003; Health insurance premiums: 54.3; Workers' earnings: 14.2; Overall inflation: 10.6. Growth in Health Insurance Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance, 2004; Health insurance premiums: 71.6; Workers' earnings: 16.6; Overall inflation: 13.1. Growth in Health Insurance Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance, 2005; Health insurance premiums: 87.4; Workers' earnings: 19.7; Overall inflation: 17.1. Growth in Health Insurance Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance, 2006; Health insurance premiums: 101.8; Workers' earnings: 24.3; Overall inflation: 21.2. Growth in Health Insurance Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance, 2007; Health insurance premiums: 114.1; Workers' earnings: 28.9; Overall inflation: 24.3. Source: Kaiser/HRET Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Benefits, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Note: Data on premium increases reflect the employer’s and employee’s cost of health insurance premiums for a family of four. [End of figure] Number of Non-elderly Uninsured Americans, 1999-2006: [See PDF for image] This figure is a vertical bar graph depicting the number of non-elderly uninsured Americans, 1999-2006. The vertical axis of the graph represents population in millions from 0 to 50. The horizontal axis of the graph represents years 199 through 2006. The following data is depicted: Number of Non-elderly Uninsured Americans: 1999: 38.8 million; 2000: 38.4 million; 2001: 39.8 million; 2002: 42.0 million; 2003: 43.4 million; 2004: 43.5 million; 2005: 44.8 million; 2006: 47.0 million. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2000-2007 Annual Social and Economic Supplements. Notes: Estimates for 1999-2005 were revised to reflect the results of a change to the survey process that assigns insurance coverage to dependents. [End of graph] Where the United States Ranks on Selected Health Outcome Indicators: Outcome: Life expectancy at birth (U.S. = 77.8 years in 2004); Rank: 23 out of 30 in 2004. Outcome: Infant Mortality (U.S. = 6.8 deaths in 2004); Rank: 26 out of 30 in 2004. Outcome: Potential Years of Life Lost( U.S. = 5,066 in 2002); Rank: 23 out of 26 in 2002. Source: OECD Health Data 2006 and 2007. Notes: Data are the most recent available for all countries. Life expectancy at birth for the total population is estimated by the OECD Secretariat for all countries, as the unweighted average of the life expectancy of men and women. Infant mortality is measured as the number of deaths per 1,000 live births. Potential years of life lost (PYLL) is the sum of the years of life lost prior to age 70, given current age- specific death rates (e.g., a death at 5 years of age is counted as 65 years of PYLL). [End of table] Issues to Consider in Examining Our Health Care System: The public needs to be educated about the differences between wants, needs, affordability, and sustainability at both the individual and aggregate level. Ideally, health care reform proposals will: * Align Incentives for providers and consumers to make prudent decisions about the use of medical services; * Foster Transparency with respect to the value and costs of care, and; * Ensure Accountability from insurers and providers to meet standards for appropriate use and quality; Ultimately, we need to address four key dimensions: access, cost, quality,and personal responsibility. Selected Potential Health Care Reform Approaches: Reform Approach: Revise the government’s payment systems and leverage its purchasing authority to foster value-based purchasing for health care products and services; Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [Empty]. Reform Approach: Consider additional flexibility for states to serve as models for possible health care reforms; Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [Empty]. Reform Approach: Consider limiting direct advertising and allowing limited importation of prescription drugs; Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [Empty]. Reform Approach: Foster more transparency in connection with health care costs and outcomes; Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [Empty]. Reform Approach: Create incentives that encourage physicians to utilize prescription drugs and other health care products and services economically and efficiently. Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [Empty]. Reform Approach: Foster the use of information technology to increase consistency, transparency, and accountability in health care; Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [Empty]. Reform Approach: Encourage case management approaches for people with chronic and expensive conditions to improve the quality and efficiency of care delivered and avoid inappropriate care. Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [Empty]. Reform Approach: Reexamine the design and operational structure of the nation’s health care entitlement programs—Medicare and Medicaid, including exploring more income-related approaches; Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [check]. Reform Approach: Revise certain federal tax preferences for health care to encourage more efficient use of health care products and services; Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [check]. Reform Approach: Foster more preventative care and wellness services and capabilities, including fighting obesity and encouraging better nutrition; Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [check]. Reform Approach: Promote more personal responsibility in connection with health care; Short-term action: [check]; Long-term action: [check]. Reform Approach: Limit spending growth for government-sponsored health care programs (e.g., percentage of the budget and/or economy); Short-term action: [Empty]; Long-term action: [check]. Reform Approach: Develop a core set of basic and essential services. Create insurance pools for alternative levels of coverage, as necessary; Short-term action: [Empty]; Long-term action: [check]. Reform Approach: Develop a set of evidence-based national practice standards to help avoid unnecessary care, improve outcomes, and reduce litigation; Short-term action: [Empty]; Long-term action: [check]. Reform Approach: Pursue multinational approaches to investing in health care R&D; Short-term action: [Empty]; Long-term action: [check]. [End of table] Moving the Debate Forward: The Sooner We Get Started, the Better: * The miracle of compounding is currently working against us; * Less change would be needed, and there would be more time to make adjustments. Our demographic changes will serve to make reform more difficult over time. Need Public Education, Discussion, and Debate: * The role of government in the 21st Century; * Which programs and policies should be changed and how; * How government should be financed. Three Key Illnesses: * Myopia; * Tunnel Vision; * Self-Centeredness. Four National Deficits: * Budget; * Balance of Payments; * Savings; * Leadership. Key Leadership Attributes Needed for These Challenging and Changing Times: * Courage; * Integrity; * Creativity: * Stewardship: * Partnership. Three Key Groups That Need to Increase Their Influence and Involvement: * The Business and Professional Community; * Young Americans; * The Media. [End of presentation] On the Web: Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cghome.htm]: Contact: Chuck Young, Managing Director, Public Affairs: YoungC1@gao.gov: (202) 512-4800: U.S. Government Accountability Office: 441 G Street NW, Room 7149: Washington, D.C. 20548: Copyright: This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.