Both citizen-driven initiatives aim to cut the costs of the obligatory health insurance (KVG / LaMal), which have been climbing for years.

The first proposal calls for capping the insurance rates at 10 percent of income, with the excess be paid for by the federal and cantonal governments.

The second, on the same ballot, provides for a ‘brake’ on health costs, which should evolve according to the economy and wages.

This brake would work in the same way as the federal spending brake. Therefore, when healthcare costs exceed wages for a given year by 20 percent, the government must take action to bring the  costs down.

READ ALSO: How Switzerland’s two crucial health insurance referendums could impact you 

What could happen if the proposals fail to gain the majority of votes?

The Swiss Trade Union (USS) estimates that if the two initiatives are rejected by voters, a family of four would have to pay 27 percent more for their health insurance by the year 2030.

These calculations are based on official government figures, the USS said.

A premium for a single adult would also increase — from 430 to 540 francs a month on average — and would likely be even higher in certain cantons, because how much of your income is spent on health insurance is determined by your place of residence. 

For instance, based on figures from the Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) and research carried out  by Ecoplan independent political and economic consultancy, a family with two young, pre-school-age children and a net income of 97,992 francs a year, will spend the biggest chunk of their income (16.5 percent) on health insurance in Basel-City.

Next are Neuchâtel (14.9 percent) and Bern (13.2 percent).

On the other hand, in Zurich, Switzerland’s (and the world’s) most expensive city, that proportion is 12.2 percent — still high, but lower than in a number of other cantons.

As a comparison, that rate in the canton of Graubünden is only 6 percent.

READ ALSO: In which Swiss cantons is most income spent on health insurance? 

But even despite the risk of much-higher premiums in the future, the Federal Council and the parliament are urging voters to reject both proposals, arguing they will not sustainably solve the soaring costs of healthcare.

Instead, they have concocted their own ‘counter-initiative’ to the two proposals that they want voters to approve.

They include having cantons increase the amount of financial help they pay toward health premiums for low-income people, and providing for more targeted measures, including specific cost control objectives for healthcare services. 

Are the two proposals more likely to be approved or turned down?

In April, GFS research institute found that 60 percent of respondents in its survey approved the initiative to cap premiums at 10 percent of income, while 36 percent were against it. The rest was undecided.

However in a more recent poll, carried out at the beginning of May by Sotomo institute, the ‘yes’ camp was smaller: 56 percent of voters were in favour of the initiative and 40 percent were against.

Here too, 4 percent were undecided.