IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/jespps/jes-07-2015-0137.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The political roots of health insurance benefit mandates

Author

Listed:
  • James Bailey
  • Douglas Webber

Abstract

Purpose - As of 2011, the average US state had 37 health insurance benefit mandates, laws requiring health insurance plans to cover a specific treatment, condition, provider, or person. This number is a massive increase from less than one mandate per state in 1965, and the topic takes on a new significance now, when the federal government is considering many new mandates as part of the “essential health benefits” required by the Affordable Care Act. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach - The authors use fixed effects estimation on 1996-2010 data to determine why some states pass more mandates than others. Findings - The authors find that the political strength of health care providers is the strongest determinant of mandates. Originality/value - A large body of literature has attempted to evaluate the effect of mandates on health, health insurance, and the labor market. However, previous papers did not consider the political processes behind the passage of mandates. In fact, when they estimate the laws’ effect, almost all papers on the subject assume that mandates are passed at random. The paper opens the way to estimating the causal effect of mandates on health insurance and the labor market using an instrumental variables strategy that incorporates political information about why mandates get passed.

Suggested Citation

  • James Bailey & Douglas Webber, 2017. "The political roots of health insurance benefit mandates," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 44(2), pages 170-182, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:jespps:jes-07-2015-0137
    DOI: 10.1108/JES-07-2015-0137
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JES-07-2015-0137/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JES-07-2015-0137/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/JES-07-2015-0137?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. James Bailey, 2014. "Who pays the high health costs of older workers? Evidence from prostate cancer screening mandates," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(32), pages 3931-3941, November.
    2. Li, Xiaoxue & Ye, Jinqi, 2017. "The spillover effects of health insurance benefit mandates on public insurance coverage: Evidence from veterans," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 45-60.
    3. Sarah Hamersma & Johanna Catherine Maclean, 2018. "Insurance Expansions and Children’s Use of Substance Use Disorder Treatment," NBER Working Papers 24499, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Health insurance; Interest groups; Benefit mandates; Health providers; D72; I13; I18;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • I13 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Insurance, Public and Private
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jespps:jes-07-2015-0137. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.