Nichols L M, Blumberg L J
Urban Institute's Health Policy Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Health Aff (Millwood). 1998 May-Jun;17(3):25-42. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.17.3.25.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 has been praised and criticized for asserting federal authority to regulate health insurance. We review the history of federalism and insurance regulation and find that HIPAA is less of a departure from traditional federal authority than it is an application of existing tools to meet evolving health policy goals. This interpretation could clarify future health policy debates about appropriate federal and state responsibilities. We also report on the insurance environments and the HIPAA implementation choices of thirteen states. We conclude with criteria for judging the success of HIPAA and the evolving federal/state partnership in health insurance regulation.
1996年的《健康保险流通与责任法案》（HIPAA）因主张联邦政府有权监管健康保险而备受赞誉和批评。我们回顾了联邦制和保险监管的历史，发现HIPAA与其说是背离传统联邦政府权力，不如说是应用现有工具以实现不断演变的健康政策目标。这种解释可以澄清未来关于联邦和州的适当职责的健康政策辩论。我们还报告了13个州的保险环境和HIPAA的实施选择。我们最后提出了判断HIPAA的成功以及健康保险监管中不断演变的联邦/州伙伴关系的标准。
