Congress advances on health care reform: one step at a time

In adopting the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), Congress made a series of small but significant steps toward improving access to health care benefits. The Act's centerpiece is its new requirements for group health plans and for the health insurance industry for assuring portability, access, and renewability of health insurance coverage. Of nearly equal importance is the pilot program established for testing the viability of medical savings accounts. Other health-related changes include adjustments in the rules governing duplication and coordinating of Medicare-related plans, recommendations with respect to privacy of health information of employees, an increase in the deduction for health insurance costs for self-employed individuals, and permission for unemployed persons to make withdrawals from IRAs and other qualified plans for certain medical services' costs. This article summarizes these and other key provisions of HIPAA.     

Accountability in health care: an essay on mechanisms, muddles, and mires

This paper presents a critical evaluation of several theories of accountability and their applicability to health care concerns. The authors first provide a preliminary refinement of the imprecise concept of accountability itself and then examine four major types (political; bureaucratic; professional; and economic-consumer). Then, by using disciplinary perspectives provided by several schools of thought in political science (legislative supremacy; general manager theory; government by bureaucracy; objective responsibility; citizen participation), they discuss the degree of accountability presently found in various American health policies. After identifying the inherent dilemmmas within any credible accountability approach to health care programs as now utilized in the United States, the authors recommend that all types of accountability be integrated and strengthened by relying more explicitly on practices characteristic of development administration.     

An analysis of congressional health policy voting in the 1970s

This paper analyzes nine health policy votes in the U.S. House of Representatives. The votes all occurred between 1973 and 1980 and include such issues as health planning, health maintenance organizations, cost containment, and professional standards review organizations. The objective of this analysis is to examine the independent contribution of variables indigenous to health issues while controlling for party identification and ideology. The influence of health providers, measured by the effect of the number of state medical association members in each state, is significant in the findings. The state and local share of Medicaid expenses is also significant in explaining several votes. Contributions from political action committees were not important until 1979, when the rising costs of campaigns gave them more influence, and when our measures of their influence improved. By the time Congress voted in 1979 on hospital cost containment legislation, the PAC variable surpassed even the AMA variable in importance.     

Equity,health, and health care

Equity goals, such as equal treatment for equal need or equality of access, commonly take pride of place among the aims of health policy. But do these conceptions, or others derived from more fundamental philosophical systems such as those of the utilitarians or John Rawls, successfully capture the way in which the term equity is generally used? If not, is it possible to find some interpretation that can command a greater consensus? This paper answers no to the first question and yes to the second. It is argued that the standard conceptions of equity ignore the processes by which health states are determined and hence the extent to which they arise from factors beyond individual control. An alternative conception is proposed that directly incorporates these considerations.     

Antitrust, health care quality, and the courts

Antitrust law represents the principal legal tool that the United States employs to police private markets, yet it often relegates quality and nonprice considerations to a secondary position. While antitrust law espouses the belief that vigorous competition will enhance quality as well as price, little evidence exists of the practical ability of courts to deliver on that promise. In this Article, Professors Hammer and Sage examine American health care as a vehicle for advancing understanding of the nexus among competition, quality, and antitrust law. The Article reports results of a comprehensive empirical review of judicial opinions in health care antitrust litigation between 1985 and 1999, with specific attention to courts' handling of quality and other nonprice concerns. Professors Hammer and Sage conclude that, although antitrust law cannot be expected to serve as the sole oversight mechanism for industries as complex and quality dependent as health care, courts have been successful incorporating some nonprice factors into antitrust analysis.     

Rationing health care: it's a matter of the health care system's structure

The article examines two primary policy proposals for how the U.S. should allocate its limited health care dollars: a centralized model in which a commission establishes rationing guidelines, and a decentralized model in which rationing decisions are made by health care providers on a case by case basis. The author finds significant advantages with each position, leading the author to assert that a combination of each is key to an effective rationing policy: a centralized control of structure coupled with decentralized physician-level decision making. While mindful that formal rationing guidelines alone are unfeasible to effectuate cost-effective care, the author introduces two decentralized policies to control costs: the limitation of resources at physicians' disposal and elimination of physicians' personal incentive to provide high-cost care.     

Symbols, rationality, and justice: rationing health care.

Proposals to ration health care in the United States meet a number of objections, symbolic and literal. Nonetheless, an acceptance of the idea of rationing is a necessary first step toward universal health insurance. It must be understood that universal health care requires an acceptance of rationing, and that such an acceptance must precede enactment of a program, if it is to be economically sound and politically feasible. Commentators have argued that reform of the health care system should come before any effort to ration. On the contrary, rationing and reform cannot be separated. The former is the key to the latter, just as rationing is the key to universal health insurance.     

Institutional Change,Party Discipline,and the House Democratic Caucus, 1911–19

Abstract The House Democratic Caucus of 1911 to 1919 is a largely understudied institution in the literature on congressional party government, despite the claims of many scholars that the caucus functioned as a significant instrument of party government by binding legislators' floor votes. An analysis of roll‐call votes, new data from the caucus journal, and contemporary accounts from the period indicate that these claims are largely exaggerated, although the caucus did, on occasion, improve floor discipline within the party. I find that intraparty homogeneity on crosscutting issues was related to caucus success. In addition, I argue that the adoption and use of the binding caucus can best be understood from the “multiple goals” viewpoint of congressional politics. These findings have important implications for understanding the development of party‐based institutions in Congress.     

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.     

The privatization of health care in Europe: an eight-country analysis

This article presents an analysis of recent changes in the public-private mix in health care in eight European countries. The leading question is to what extent a process of privatization in health care can be observed. The framework for the analysis of privatization draws on the idea that there are multiple public/private boundaries in health care. The overall picture that emerges from our analysis is diverse, but there is evidence that health care in Europe has become somewhat more private. The growth of the public fraction in health care spending has come to an end since the 1980s, and in a few countries the private fraction even increased substantially. We also found some evidence for a shift from public to private in health care provision. Furthermore, there are signs of privatization in health care management and operations, as well as investments. Specific attention is spent on the identification of factors that push privatization forward and factors that work as a barrier to privatization.