a LeadingAge LTSS Center, McCormack Graduate School of Policy and Global Studies , University of Massachusetts Boston , Boston , Massachusetts , USA.
b Center for Consumer Engagement in Health Innovation , Community Catalyst , Boston , Massachusetts , USA.
J Aging Soc Policy. 2018 May-Jun;30(3-4):209-226. doi: 10.1080/08959420.2018.1462680. Epub 2018 May 16.
The need for long-term services and supports (LTSS) presents a growing financial burden on disabled individuals, their families, and state Medicaid budgets. Strategies for addressing this problem pose both a policy design and a political challenge. This article begins by explaining the choices and trade-offs policy makers face in designing new policy and offers the outlines of a specific approach to navigating these. It then concludes with an assessment of current LTSS policy directions and politics-specifically, the movement to constrain, rather than enhance, federal financing for LTSS and the counterpressures necessary to strengthen meaningful insurance protection. While the political environment has become even less conducive to expansion of public benefits, the underlying problem of LTSS financing will grow and persist. And politics change. Thus, in this paper we offer and explain the choices we would make to bridge the political divide-specifically, a proposal to develop a new public-private partnership based on a public program to cover "back-end" or catastrophic costs plus measures making private insurance more attractive for the "up-front" risk, an approach that has recently been endorsed by a number of bipartisan groups.
长期服务和支持(LTSS)的需求给残疾个人、他们的家庭和州医疗补助预算带来了日益增长的财务负担。解决这个问题的策略既带来了政策设计的挑战,也带来了政治挑战。本文首先解释了政策制定者在设计新政策时面临的选择和权衡,并提供了一种具体方法的要点,以引导他们解决这些问题。然后,本文以对当前 LTSS 政策方向和政治的评估结束——特别是限制而不是加强联邦对 LTSS 融资的举措,以及加强有意义的保险保护所需的反压力。尽管政治环境变得更不利于扩大公共福利,但 LTSS 融资的基本问题仍将继续存在并加剧。而且政治是会变化的。因此,在本文中,我们提供并解释了我们将做出的选择,以弥合政治分歧——具体来说,是提出建立一个新的公私合作伙伴关系的建议,该关系基于一个覆盖“后端”或灾难性费用的公共计划,加上使私人保险对“前端”风险更具吸引力的措施,这一方法最近得到了许多两党团体的认可。