A joint study conducted by the Institute for Health Policy Studies (IEPS) and the nonprofit Umane evaluated 95 health proposals across the government programs of the six presidential candidates registering at least 2% in opinion polls for the 2026 election. The sample covered Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Flavio Bolsonaro, Ronaldo Caiado, Romeu Zema, Renan Santos, and Augusto Cury. The findings show that 56% of campaign pledges already exist within Brazil's Unified Health System (SUS), while 95% of the total proposals require additional financial resources.
The report notes that 47% of proposed initiatives lack execution details and fail to identify funding sources, offering only broad intentions. Furthermore, 83% of all measures rely directly on administrative pacts between the federal government, states, and municipalities. One example cited by researchers is the promise to use the national registry number (CPF) as the single patient identifier in public healthcare, a measure that was already regulated and implemented in 2025.
Structural divergences and overlooked priorities
The analysis identified sharp differences in technical consistency across campaign documents. While Ronaldo Caiado presented the highest proportion of detailed implementation plans (76%), coupled with an 84% reliance on interstate agreements, Augusto Cury did not detail how any of his 10 proposals would be executed, relying on unverified personal theories for mental health care. Lula's platform focuses on extending existing programs in 19 of 21 proposals, while Flavio Bolsonaro proposes updating SUS reimbursement tables without identifying revenue sources. Renan Santos presents the heaviest legal obstacles, with 71% of plans requiring statutory changes, including removing the constitutional spending floor for health.
The research also measured significant gaps regarding emerging public health pressures. The expansion of online betting, which involved 25 million Brazilians in 2025 and carries an estimated social cost of 38.8 billion reais per year, was handled strictly as a household financial matter across platforms. Similarly, 29% of SUS clinics and hospitals sit within 500 meters of high geological risk zones, yet climate resilience plans remain isolated within environmental platforms without direct connection to healthcare capacity.
How citizens can evaluate campaign pledges
To confirm whether a promised service already exists in the public network, citizens can check the Meu SUS Digital platform and local municipal health secretariats, which list available clinics, specialized programs, and vaccination schedules. Monitoring local municipal health council reports also helps verify whether public clinics receive their mandated constitutional transfers to sustain daily healthcare delivery.