Joachim O. Hero (
Anna D. Sinaiko is an assistant professor of health economics and policy in the Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, in Boston, Massachusetts.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2021 Sep;40(9):1420-1429. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2021.00624.
Political orientation can be a powerful motivator of certain health care decisions. This study examines how political orientation was associated with decisions to use the Affordable Care Act Marketplaces to enroll in nongroup health insurance plans and whether it was also associated with adverse financial consequences. We used administrative records and surveys of nongroup Marketplace enrollees from a large insurer in New England. Enrollees were categorized as Republican, Democrat, or independent through self-identification or were assigned to one of the political parties after responding to a political preference question. Republican enrollees were less likely than Democratic enrollees of comparable subsidy eligibility to enroll through the Marketplaces and receive subsidies. Among income-eligible enrollees, Republican subscribers received $66 per month less in premium subsidies than Democratic subscribers, equivalent to roughly $800 per year. However, this result varied by subgroups in the parties, and our results suggest that party effects on decision making may inversely relate to the magnitude of the financial consequence. Navigating the ongoing political polarization in the United States requires optimizing public policies, as well as the associated education and outreach, to ensure maximal efficacy regardless of political orientation.
政治倾向可能是某些医疗保健决策的强大动机。本研究考察了政治倾向如何与使用平价医疗法案市场来注册非团体健康保险计划的决策相关联,以及它是否与不利的财务后果相关联。我们使用了来自新英格兰一家大型保险公司的非团体市场注册者的行政记录和调查。注册者通过自我认同被归类为共和党人、民主党人或独立人士,或者在回答政治偏好问题后被分配到其中一个政党。与具有类似补贴资格的民主党注册者相比,共和党注册者通过市场注册并获得补贴的可能性较小。在符合收入条件的注册者中,共和党用户获得的保费补贴比民主党用户每月少 66 美元,相当于每年约 800 美元。然而,这一结果因党派中的亚组而异,我们的结果表明,决策中的党派效应可能与财务后果的大小成反比。在美国,要应对持续的政治极化,需要优化公共政策,以及相关的教育和外展工作,以确保无论政治倾向如何,都能达到最大的效果。