Child health policy in the U.S.: the paradox of consensus

The U.S. spends more of its total GNP on health services than any other nation, yet it has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the industrialized world. Young American children are immunized at rates that are one-half those of Western Europe, Canada, and Israel. In the mid-1980s, a consensus among policymakers on the need for federal action to improve child health services resulted in the expansion of Medicaid eligibility for pregnant women and young children and the separation of Medicaid eligibility from eligibility for AFDC. The current phase of child health policymaking includes discussion of much broader proposals for changes in health care financing and innovation in health care delivery. This examination of child health policy begins by reviewing the politics of maternal and child health services from the early twentieth century to the Reagan administration, including the role of feminist movements, the development of pediatrics, and the expansion of federal involvement during the 1960s. Next, the politics of Medicaid expansion as a strategy for addressing child health issues are discussed. Current critiques of child health services in the U.S. are examined, along with proposals to restructure health care financing and delivery. Central to the politics of child health policy during the 1980s and into the 1990s is the way in which child health has been defined. Infant mortality and childhood illness are presented as preventable problems. Investment in young children is discussed as a prudent as well as a compassionate policy, one which will reduce future health care costs and enhance our position in the international economy. Unlike other "disadvantaged groups," children are universally viewed as innocent and deserving of societal support. Framing child health issues in these terms helped to produce consensus on the expansion of Medicaid eligibility. Yet the issues beyond the expansion of Medicaid eligibility involve the restructuring of health care financing and delivery, and, on these issues, conflict is far more likely than consensus.     

Breaking gridlock: the determinants of health policy change in Congress

Prior to the 2010 health care reforms, scholars often commented that health policy making in Congress was mired in political gridlock, that reforms were far more likely to fail than to succeed, and that the path forward was unclear. In light of recent events, new narratives are being advanced. In formulating these assessments, scholars of health politics tend to analyze individual major reform proposals to determine why they succeeded or failed and what lessons could be drawn for the future. Taking a different approach, we examine all health policies proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives between 1973 and 2002. We analyze these bills' fates and the effectiveness of their sponsors in guiding these proposals through Congress. Setting these proposed policies against a baseline of policy advancements in other areas, we demonstrate that health policy making has indeed been far more gridlocked than policy making in most other areas. We then isolate some of the causes of this gridlock, as well as some of the conditions that have helped to bring about health policy change.     

Policy change and health care research

Explaining policy change is one of the most central tasks of contemporary policy analysis. Reacting to overly rigid institutionalist frameworks that emphasize stability rather than change, a growing number of scholars have formulated new theoretical models to shed light on policy change. Focusing on health care reform but drawing on the broader social science literature on policy and politics, this article offers critical perspectives on the institutionalist and ideational literatures on policy change while assessing their relevance for analyzing change in contemporary health care systems. The last section sketches a research agenda for studying policy change in health care.     

The politics of management in health care: a British perspective

This paper discusses the contribution of organizational political perspectives to a better appreciation of policy implementation problems in health care. The context is the efforts of successive British governments to accord a higher priority to community health and long-stay services. The limited success of these policies owes much to continuing medical control of the philosophy of the organization and agenda, in spite of government responsibility for funding and providing health services. More effective policy implementation depends on a recognition of the "naturalness" of organizational politics, rather than treating them as constraints in an otherwise rational, managerial system.     

Therapeutic jurisprudence: A framework for evidence-informed health care policymaking

Translation of evidence-based practice (EBP) into health care policy is of growing importance, with discussions most often focused on how to fund and otherwise promote EBP through policy (i.e., at system level, beyond the bedside). Less attention has been focused on how to ensure that such policies - as enacted and implemented, and as distinguished from the practices underlying policies - do not themselves cause harm, or at least frustrate accomplishment of "therapeutic" goals of EBP. On a different front, principles of therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ) in law have been developed, most prominently in certain areas of law (e.g., mental health and family law), to support more collaborative, less traumatic advocacy and conflict resolution. This paper draws on current applications of TJ and translates such into a therapeutic approach to health care policymaking that moves beyond promotion of EBP in policy. Health care policy itself may be viewed as an intervention that impacts health, positively or not. The goal is to offer a framework for health care policymaking grounded in TJ principles that does not focus on which evidence is "right" for policy use, but rather how we can better understand how consequences of policy, intended or not, affect the well-being of populations. Such framework thus moves policymaking from an either/or debate to a data- and human-driven process. Utilizing TJ framing questions, policies can be developed and evaluated through open dialogue among diverse voices at the table, including - like interventions - the "patients" or, here, targets of such policies. Collectively, they clarify how ends sought - to enhance (or at least not impair) health - can best be achieved through policy when needed, recognizing that as an intervention, there are limits to and boundaries on the usefulness of policy.     

The political management of managed care: explaining variations in state health maintenance organization regulations

In the 1990s, strong incentives for managed care organizations to control costs, once regarded as a fortuitous confluence of interests, came to be seen as antithetical to consumers' interests in quality of care. In response to this change in political climate, many states have greatly increased their regulatory control of managed care organizations since the mid-1990s. This activity is surprising in an era when public policy on health care issues is usually described as frozen, gridlocked, and/or stalemated as a result of intense activity on the part of organized interests. We take advantage of the variation in state regulations of health maintenance organizations (HMOs) to discover why some governments are able to address policy problems that are often perceived as intractable in a political if not in a true policy sense. From the history of HMOs, the backlash against managed care, and state responses to that backlash, we first extract a number of hypotheses about state regulatory activity. We then test these hypotheses with data on regulatory adoptions by states during the late 1990s and the early 2000s. Last, we discuss the findings with special attention to the role of politics in health care.     

Purchasing power: business and health policy change in Massachusetts

As in many states around the country, health care costs in Massachusetts had risen to an unprecedented proportion of the state budget by the early 1980s. State health policymakers realized that dramatic changes were needed in the political process to break provider control over health policy decisions. This paper presents a case study of policy change in Massachusetts between 1982 and 1988. State officials formulated a strategy to mobilize corporate interests, which were already awakening to the problems of high health care costs, as a countervailing power to the political monopoly of provider interests. Once mobilized, business interests became organized politically and even became dominant at times, controlling both the policy agenda and its process. Ultimately, business came to be viewed as a permanent part of the coalitions and commissions that helped formulate state health policy. Although initially allied with provider interests, business eventually forged a stronger alliance with the state, an alliance that has the potential to force structural change in health care politics in Massachusetts for years to come. The paper raises questions about the consequences of such alliances between public and private power for both the content and the process of health policymaking at the state level.     

Reform, change, and continuity in Finnish health care

This article describes some essential aspects of the Finnish political and governmental system and the evolution of the basic institutional elements of the health care system. We examine the developments that gave rise to a series of health care reforms and reform proposals in the late 1980s and early 1990s and relate them to changes in health care expenditure, structure, and performance. Finally, we discuss the relationship between policy changes, reforms, and health system changes and the strength of neo-institutional theory in explaining both continuity and change. Much of the change in Finnish health care can be explained by institutional path dependency. The tradition of strong but small local authorities and the lack of legitimate democratic regional authorities as well as the coexistence of a dominant Beveridge-style health system with a marginal Bismarckian element explain the specific path of Finnish health care reform. Public responsibility for health care has been decentralized to smaller local authorities (known as municipalities) more than in any other country. Even an exceptionally deep economic recession in the early 1990s did not lead to systems change; rather, the economic imperative was met by the traditional centralized policy pattern. Some of the developments of the 1990s are, however, difficult to explain by institutional theory. Thus, there is a need for testing alternative theories as well.     

New federalism and health care policy: states and the old questions

The New Federalism that evolved under the Reagan administration tends to grant states more discretion in the implementation of health care programs. It thereby rekindles old concerns about the commitment, capacity, and progressivity of the states. This paper reviews recent policy developments and reconsiders state performance from the vantage point of the mid-1980s. While hard evidence remains elusive, a plausible case exists that any gap between the states and Washington on commitment, capacity, and progressivity has diminished. State administrative capacity in particular has probably increased. The continued presence of substantial variation among the states needs to be underscored, however. Moreover, the relentless imperative of economic development, or migration, theory sets severe limits on how far states can go in adopting redistributive measures to assure adequate medical care for the poor. Given current federal laws, the most optimistic, plausible scenario envisions the rise of a technical politics of efficiency in the states. In spite of state limitations, health policy reformers need to pay increased attention to their potential role.     

My health policy nightmare

Imagine that the United States did not have universal public education. What would the politics of extending access to education look like? It might have a nightmarish cast but also look rather familiar. Thinking about that yields some disturbing implications about the politics of health reform and, in particular, the politics of universal coverage within the broader policy discussion about "health reform."     

Reform and the politics of hybridization in mature health care states

This article examines the cases of three health care states -- two of which (Britain and the Netherlands) have undergone major policy reform and one of which (Canada) has experienced only marginal adjustments. The British and Dutch reforms have variously altered the balance of power, the mix of instruments of control, and the organizing principles. As a result, mature systems representing the ideal-typical health care state categories of national health systems and social insurance (Britain and the Netherlands, respectively) were transformed into distinctive national hybrids. These processes have involved a politics of redesign that differs from the politics of earlier phases of establishment and retrenchment. In particular, the redesign phase is marked by the activity of institutional entrepreneurs who exploit specific opportunities afforded by public programs to combine public and private resources in innovative organizational arrangements. Canada stands as a counterpoint: no window of opportunity for major change occurred, and the bilateral monopoly created by its prototypical single-payer model provided few footholds for entrepreneurial activity. The increased significance of institutional entrepreneurs gives greater urgency to one of the central projects of health policy: the design of accountability frameworks to allow for an assessment of performance against objectives.     

The paradoxical politics of provider reempowerment

The recent decline, indeed perhaps dismantling, of managed care is sometimes treated as both consequence and cause of the political reempowerment of medical providers, whose professional dominance managed care had challenged. Drawing evidence from Round III of the Community Tracking Study of the Center for Studying Health System Change, this article reviews the politics of four "arenas" of managed care regulation--prompt payment, mandated benefits, external appeals, and financial solvency--and concludes that the power of providers is contingent on patterns of coalition and conflict that differ across the discrete arenas. The zero-sum connotations of the "de" and "re" empowerment of providers under managed care fail to capture the subtlety of providers' search for fresh cultural, economic, and political resources in shifting policy contexts.     

Hidden convergence: toward a historical comparison of U.S. and U.K. health policy

The social science literature on the comparative history of the welfare state offers conflicting accounts of the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom. At first blush, the comparative history of health care policy in the United States and the United Kingdom seems to affirm the dominant view that the U.S. and U.K. welfare states have diverged substantially during the twentieth century. A comparison of U.S. and U.K. health policy, however, suggests that there are more parallels and points of tangency between the two systems than are readily apparent. The comparative history of health policy over the past century reveals common political and policy challenges and frequent interchanges of policy ideas, and helps uncover the political dynamics behind the development of health policy in the two countries, which can, in turn, help illuminate the contemporary politics of reform in both countries.     

Obesity, courts, and the new politics of public health

Health care politics are changing. They increasingly focus not on avowedly public projects (such as building the health care infrastructure) but on regulating private behavior. Examples include tobacco, obesity, abortion, drug abuse, the right to die, and even a patient's relationship with his or her managed care organization. Regulating private behavior introduces a distinctive policy process; it alters the way we introduce (or frame) political issues and shifts many important decisions from the legislatures to the courts. In this article, we illustrate the politics of private regulation by following a dramatic case, obesity, through the political process. We describe how obesity evolved from a private matter to a political issue. We then assess how different political institutions have responded and conclude that courts will continue to take the leading role.     

Ethnic politics, policy fragmentation, and dependent health care access in California

One out of every six nonelderly Americans without health insurance lives in California. The problem of access to competent and dependable health care is especially problematic among the state's minority, and especially Hispanic, population. Because one-third of the country's Hispanics live in California, how this state deals with health access issues will affect the practice and progress toward universal care in the nation as a whole. Expanding health care access to California's dependent population will involve overcoming a number of well-known administrative and fiscal obstacles, including an underfunded, highly fragmented public health care system that has developed incrementally and incoherently over decades. However, a key to understanding the problem of access to health care in California involves a story of how ethnic conflict and partisan politics often conspire to deny or discourage access for eligible women and children.     

Chronic disease and disadvantage: the new politics of HIV infection

HIV infection is now perceived as the end stage of a chronic disease that is spreading most rapidly among blacks and Hispanics. The politics of the HIV epidemic in the 1980s were dominated by four interacting factors: fear and fascination; who had the disease and to whom it seemed to be spreading; the endemic problems of United States social policy; and the impact on policy of advances in scientific knowledge. This paper analyzes the political history of each of these factors and describes the dominant policies of the federal government and the states regarding HIV in the areas of surveillance, prevention, research, and financing. Four uncertainties will have a profound influence on the future politics of the HIV epidemic: how the states and the federal government will address the general problems of paying for the care of people with chronic diseases and providing access to care for the uninsured and the underinsured; the number and distribution of the sexual behaviors that transmit infection with HIV and the effectiveness of policies to persuade people to modify these behaviors; precisely who uses addictive drugs and the effectiveness of measures to change their behavior; and the natural history of the virus.     

The resistible rise of preventive medicine

The politics of preventive health care have changed dramatically in the last fifteen years. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, prevention was the motherhood issue of health care reform. With only the slightest glimmer of controversy, vaccination, promotion of lifestyle changes, mass screening, and safety regulation all became widely accepted strategies for improving health and reducing medical expenditures. By the mid-1980s, the dark side of each strategy became visible. Vaccinations can cause serious and permanent injuries; lifestyle factors are being used to raise insurance premiums, to deny eligibility for disability insurance benefits, and to deny employment. Screening is similarly used to deny employment, and new technologies for prenatal screening have raised fears of stigma and selective abortion among racial, handicapped, and antiabortion groups. Occupational safety regulation is increasingly focused on excluding the "high-risk" individual from jobs. In the absence of social protections from these economic and social harms, citizens have used tort and civil rights litigation to resist preventive health measures.     

The patient protection and affordable care act: the victory of unorthodox lawmaking

The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was a major legislative achievement of the 111th Congress. This law structurally reforms the US health care system by encouraging universal health care coverage through regulated competition among private insurance companies. When looking at the process for reform, what strikes an observer of US health care policy in the first place is that the Democratic majority was able to enact something in a political field characterized by strong resistance to change. This article builds on that observation. Arguments concentrate on the legislative process of the reform and support the idea that it may be partly explained by considering an evolution of US legislative institutions, mostly in the sense of a more centralized legislative process. Based on approximately one hundred semidirected interviews, I argue that the Democratic majority, building on lessons from both President Bill Clinton's health care reform attempt and the Republicans' strategy of using strong congressional leadership to pass social reforms, was able to overcome institutional constraints that have long prevented comprehensive change. A more centralized legislative process, which has been described as "unorthodox lawmaking," enabled the Democratic leadership to overcome multiple institutional and political veto players.     

Introduction to a decade of transition

A brief review of the last decade or so of developments in health politics, policy and law suggests that health is no longer a field of mere "dynamics without change." Responding not only to economic strains but also to new conceptual challenges to the assumptions of the traditional medical model, in the 1970s and 1980s policy makers have launched various competitive and regulatory programs aimed mainly at containing costs. These interventions, however, have mainly sought savings through reductions in waste and inappropriate utilization; they have done little about deeper cost-increasing forces such as demographic trends, technology, and personnel patterns. Nor have these innovations on the cost side of the policy ledger been matched by action on the benefit side. Such changes await reconceptualization of the practical meaning of social justice and of the role of government in the health field.