The Five Characteristics Of The RAND Health Insurance Experiment

Simultaneously, health and healthcare policy plays a tremendous role in the quality of life of every American. Likewise, by the government constantly interceding, health and healthcare is significantly influenced by the political climate and undertakings of administration; therefore creating a conflictual split between republicans and democrats. Health care is regarded as a product rather than a human right shaped by policymaking. Policies establish healthcare service stipulations, which are rooted in local, state, and federal statutes combined with landmark court decisions. Not only does policy focus on healthcare services; but, it also places a substantial emphasis on cost-efficiency and equality.

The U.S. health care system faces challenges that indicate that the people urgently need to be reform. Attention has rightly focused on the approximately 46 million Americans who are uninsured, and on the many insured Americans who face rapid increases in premiums and out-of-pocket costs. As Congress and the Obama administration consider ways to invest new funds to reduce the number of Americans without insurance coverage, we must simultaneously address shortfalls in the quality and efficiency of care that lead to higher costs and to poor health outcomes. To do otherwise casts doubt on the feasibility and sustainability of coverage expansions and also ensures that our current health care system will continue to have large gaps even for those with access to insurance coverage.

Rising health insurance premiums have made healthcare unaffordable in the United States. Health insurance premiums in this country have undergone a steady rise over the past few years while incomes have remained the same. More than 50% of individuals with low incomes holding private insurance in the United States are unable to afford their healthcare costs (Collins, Gunja, Doty & Buetel, 2015). In addition, costs related to healthcare are equally unaffordable to 25% of working-age individuals who hold private health insurance policies (Collins et al., 2015). According to the Kaiser Family Foundation/Health Research and Educational Trust (Kaiser/HRET) survey on employer health benefits, employer-sponsored health insurance plans have also had moderate rises in premiums in 2013 for both individuals and family coverage (Claxton et al., 2013). While

Since the advent of health insurance in the 1950s, there have been many models of care that are come to the scene in an attempt to both control cost of care and improve quality of care. Insurance models came into being because the fee for service model used until then was proving to increase cost of healthcare without any measure of quality of services and care provided. Health insurance models have evolved from the basic hospital offered insurance to employer sponsored coverage plans. The US health system is broken both financially and quality wise with more than 20% of gross domestic product being spent on healthcare (Blackstone, 2016).

As a growing number of Americans find themselves without health insurance, it is demanded that the United States explore innovative policies aimed at extending coverage. The high cost of expanding coverage raises many questions about how best to improve access while preserving individual choice and maintaining quality of care. Differing viewpoints among policymakers, insurers, doctors, hospital administrators, employers, public health advocates, and health policy researchers provide a complete picture of the current and desired state of American healthcare.

Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or ‘Obamacare’ in 2010 and its implementation in 2014,there has been a steady decline in the uninsured population of the United States of America. The number of Americans with health insurance, has reached a historic peak. According to recent data from the Census Bureau about health insurance coverage, the number of uninsured Americans fell from 33 million the year prior to ACA implementation to 29 million in 2014.The total uninsured rate dropped by more than 4 percent since the health care law took effect. The ACA has significantly reduced the number of Americans who were not able to acquire health insurance due to poverty, unemployment, or having a pre-existing condition.

Since the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, there has been a continuous debate about the effects it will have on the United States economy. Many people argue that expanding insurance coverage for all people will create crippling cost burdens for the economy and taxpayers. While others believe that the ACA will in fact give the economy a much-needed boost. In 2006 as a measure to improve overall healthcare, the state of Massachusetts implemented the Health Care Insurance Reform Act. This paper looks at the positive and negative effects of the Massachusetts Health Care Insurance Reform Act (MHRA). Using a literature review of public health studies ranging from 2009-2012, I argue that there are both positive and negative effects of the Massachusetts Health Care Insurance Reform. While the Massachusetts Reform increased health insurance coverage for all citizens and decreased the number of uninsured citizens accessing emergency rooms, it also did very little to decrease already existing racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities among minorities and whites in the state of Massachusetts. Understanding the Massachusetts Health Care Insurance Reform Act may help in the goal of trying to achieve near-universal healthcare. This paper provides an understanding of the missing pieces in the Massachusetts Health Care Insurance Reform Act and constitutes a starting place from which to understand the Affordable Care Act.

In the Oregon Experiment, researchers found that expansion of Medicaid services in Oregon to low income individuals resulted in a significant increase of diagnosing and treating diabetes, increase of preventative healthcare services, lowered depression rates, and drastically lowered out-of-pocket costs for catastrophic events (Baicker, Taubman, Allen, Bernstein, Gruber, Newhouse, Schneider, Wright, Zaslavesky, & Finkelstein, 2013). Although expanding Medicaid programs significantly increases the budgets at the state level, the overall benefits of providing adequate care and financial protection to low income residents outweigh the alternative of the previous health delivery

In the current U.S. system the free market prevails and companies, in this case, major insurance providers “compete” for business. This competitive business approach should in theory drive costs down. For some reason, however, an argument can be made that it has produced the opposite result in profiteering. The nation’s largest insurer, UnitedHealth, boasted over a 10 percent revenue increase in 2013 according to Forbes (2013). Health insurance affordability contributes to the disparity in access to health care, as evidenced by the fact that there are millions that are still uncovered. A greater majority of certain minorities lack both health insurance and the financial resource to seek out either health care or insurance. While insurance companies reap huge profits the percent of private sector companies offering health insurance has dropped to less than 50 percent (Kaiser, 2013). There is decidedly a lack of coordination of care for this at risk population as well, since treatment is rendered sporadically and with continuously changing providers. The last major challenge is that of improving the quality of health care. According to a 2010 report by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (OIG), an estimated 13.5 percent of Medicare beneficiaries experienced adverse events during their hospital stay and an additional 13.5 percent experienced a temporary

Before the Affordable Care Act, 50.7 million Americans (16.7 percent) were uninsured. The main reason for this was money. The majority of these uninsured American families simply couldn’t afford health insurance and those who did have insurance spent a good chunk of their income to pay for it. The percentage of Americans who were covered by employment-based health insurance (the most popular form of insurance at the time) was the lowest it had been since 1987 when the first statistics on

Evaluating the positive and negative impacts of such fundamental reform to the health care system is filled with uncertainty. As with any new legislation, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) required financial projections that would be shared with lawmakers and the American people. The CBO projected that “the ACA would increase health insurance coverage by 32 million people and would raise federal government spending by almost $1 trillion over the subsequent decade, but would also raise revenues and reduce spending by even more so that the bill overall reduced the federal budget deficit.” (CBO, 2010) These CBO projections have played a vital role in the on-going legislative arguments over the ACA.

One of this health care’s programs objective is to limit the number of uninsured (Shi & Singh, 2015). This controversial healthcare plan incorporates a privately funded insurance which is paid for through employment and solely by the patient and a publicly funded insurance by the government. Medicare is provided for senior citizens 65 and older, and Medicaid is provided for low income citizens. The federal government and state government both partake in the funding of Medicaid. Although insurance is provided to the low income through Medicaid, the United States continues to suffer from cost escalation spending 17.1 percent of GDP on healthcare in 2013, a 50 percent more than the second nation (Commonwealth, n.d.) The high cost and limited coverage continues to spark up the conversation for a

Harrington, S.E. “ US Health Care Reform: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” Journal of Risk and Insurance 77:703-708

The propose of this article is to present the advantages and disadvantages of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or Obamacare which make all Americans insurable, by requiring insurers to accept all applicants at rates based on population averages regardless of health status. The ACA increases coverage by allowing states to expand Medicaid (the social healthcare program for families and people with low income and resources) as well to cover everyone near the poverty line, and by subsidizing private insurance for people who do not get workplace coverage (Mark A Hall, Richard Lord, 2016)

Currently, the issue of health insurance has been a bone of contention for the public regarding whether the United States government should provide this health plan or not. People often possess different perspectives and refer to pros and cons on both sides of the spectrum. While some believes a universal healthcare system will set a foundation for a lower quality of service, increasing governmental finance deficit, and higher taxes, others do not hold the same thought. A universal healthcare system brings enormous advantages rather than disadvantages, such as all-inclusive population coverage, convenient accessibility, low time cost, and affordable medical cost, all of which not only provide minimum insurance to the disadvantaged but also improve the efficiency of medical resources distribution.