Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University.
Milbank Q. 2020 Jun;98(2):260-278. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12454. Epub 2020 Mar 18.
Policy Points States are enacting a host of policy initiatives designed to reduce the number of Americans without health insurance. Policymakers and policy analysts need to examine whether this "laboratory of federalism" is producing ideas that can and should be replicated on a national scale. This article evaluates reform efforts in two states: Washington state, which enacted what its policymakers call a "public option" and New Mexico, which failed in its effort to enact a Medicaid buy-in. Some common themes emerge. First, without federal funding, state efforts to aid the uninsured remain limited. Second, the gap between commercial and public insurance reimbursement rates poses an additional significant obstacle. Washington state was able to overcome these obstacles by enacting a law (called Cascade Care) which imposes public sector reimbursement rates in a commercial insurance market (the state's ACA Marketplace). This quasi- or redefined public option could become a politically viable model for federal policymakers.
政策要点
各州正在制定大量政策举措,旨在减少没有医疗保险的美国人的数量。政策制定者和政策分析家需要研究这个“联邦制的实验室”是否产生了可以并应该在全国范围内复制的想法。本文评估了两个州的改革努力:华盛顿州颁布了其政策制定者所谓的“公共选择”,而新墨西哥州则未能实施医疗补助参保。一些共同的主题出现了。首先,没有联邦资金,州政府援助无保险者的努力仍然有限。其次,商业保险和公共保险报销率之间的差距构成了另一个重大障碍。华盛顿州通过颁布一项法律(称为 Cascad Care)来克服这些障碍,该法律在商业保险市场(该州的 ACA 市场)中规定了公共部门的报销率。这种准公共选择或重新定义的公共选择可能成为联邦政策制定者的一个可行的政治模式。