Law Commons^™

Changing The Tax Code To Create Consumer-Driven Health Insurance Competition, Regina Herzlinger, Barak D. Richman

Faculty Scholarship

Because current tax laws exclude employer-paid health insurance premiums from employees’ taxable wages and income, employer-sponsored insurance remains the primary source of health insurance for most employed Americans. Economists have long blamed the employer-based insurance tax exclusion for inflating health care costs, and, more recently, for constraining income growth and exacerbating income inequality.

We execute a simulation to test the effect of permitting employees to receive their employers’ premium contribution directly and then purchase health insurance themselves, using tax-free funds. Employees could deduct for income tax purposes the amount used for insurance and, if they spend less than the amount …

N.C. Medicaid Reform: A Bipartisan Path Forward, Barak D. Richman, Allison Rice

Faculty Scholarship

The North Carolina Medicaid program currently constitutes 32% of the state budget and provides insurance coverage to 18% of the state’s population. At the same time, 13% of North Carolinians remain uninsured, and even among the insured, significant health disparities persist across income, geography, education, and race.

The Duke University Bass Connections Medicaid Reform project gathered to consider how North Carolina could use its limited Medicaid dollars more effectively to reduce the incidence of poor health, improve access to healthcare, and reduce budgetary pressures on the state’s taxpayers.

This report is submitted to North Carolina’s policymakers and citizens. It assesses …

Compelling Interests And Contraception, Neil S. Siegel, Reva B. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

On the eve of Griswold v. Connecticut’s fiftieth anniversary, employers are bringing challenges under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) to federal laws requiring them to include contraception in the health insurance benefits that they offer their employees. In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, five Justices asserted that the government has compelling interests in ensuring employees access to contraception, but did not discuss those interests in any detail. In what follows, we clarify those interests by connecting discussion in the Hobby Lobby opinions and the federal government’s briefs to related cases on compelling interests and individual rights in the areas …

“Early-Bird Special” Indeed!: Why The Tax Anti-Injunction Act Permits The Present Challenges To The Minimum Coverage Provision, Neil S. Siegel, Michael C. Dorf

Faculty Scholarship

In view of the billions of dollars and enormous effort that might otherwise be wasted, the public interest will be best served if the Supreme Court of the United States decides the present challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) during its October 2011 Term. Potentially standing in the way, however, is the federal Tax Anti-Injunction Act (TAIA), which bars any “suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax.” The dispute to date has turned on the fraught and complex question of whether the ACA's exaction for being uninsured qualifies as a …

Overbilling And Informed Financial Consent — A Contractual Solution, Barak D. Richman, Mark A. Hall, Kevin A. Schulman

Faculty Scholarship

U.S. hospitals and physicians regularly charge uninsured patients and patients receiving care outside their health-plan networks far more what most health insurers pay and far more than their actual costs. Such practices have triggered over 100 lawsuits and prompted calls for pricing transparency in Congress and price regulation in several states. This Perspective argues that the theory of implied contracts, a foundation in most first-year courses in contract law, offers a useful legal and ethical mechanism for handling these troubling problems in health care billing.

Mental Health Care Consumption And Outcomes: Considering Preventative Strategies Across Race And Class, Barak D. Richman, Dan Grossman, Frank A. Sloan, Craig Chepke

Faculty Scholarship

In previous work (Richman 2007), we found that even under conditions of equal insurance coverage and access to mental healthcare providers, whites and high-income individuals consume more outpatient mental health services than nonwhites and low-income individuals. We follow-up that study to determine (1) whether nonwhite and low-income individuals obtain medical substitutes to mental healthcare, and (2) whether disparate consumption leads to disparate health outcomes. We find that nonwhites and low-income individuals are more likely than their white and high-income counterparts to obtain mental health care from general practitioners over mental healthcare providers, and nearly twice as likely not to follow …

The Liberty Of Free Riders: The Minimum Coverage Provision, Mill’S “Harm Principle,” And American Social Morality, Jedediah Purdy, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, the authors show that cost-shifting and adverse selection problems link the federalism dimension of the debate over the Affordable Care Act to the doctrinally separate and suppressed individual rights dimension. As the scope of these free-rider problems justifies federal power to require individuals to obtain health insurance coverage, so the very existence of the free-rider problems illuminates the difficulty of arguing directly — as opposed to indirectly through the Commerce Clause — that the minimum coverage provision infringes individual liberty. The interdependence between some people’s decisions to forgo insurance and the well-being of other people means that …

Concentration In Health Care Markets: Chronic Problems And Better Solutions, Barak D. Richman

Faculty Scholarship

Health care providers with market power enjoy substantially more pricing freedom than monopolists in other markets, for a reason not generally recognized: US-style health insurance. Consequently, monopolies in health care cause undesirable redistribution of wealth and inefficient allocation of resources, both of which burden consumers at levels beyond those of other monopolists. The unusual costliness of monopoly power in health care markets demands far more policy attention than it has received. For starters, the health sector needs a more aggressive antitrust policy that effectively prevents the creation of new provider market power through mergers, alliances, or government immunity. An immediate …

Who Pays? Who Benefits? Unfairness In American Health Care, Clark C. Havighurst, Barak D. Richman

Faculty Scholarship

American-style health insurance greatly amplifies price-gouging opportunities for health care providers, who inflate prices both to enrich themselves and to subsidize and expand the nation’s health care enterprise. To the extent that lower- and middle-income Americans with private health coverage pay premiums that go to support and expand the system, they are subject to an unfair (regressive) “head tax” levied by unaccountable entities for ostensibly public but also private purposes. Lower-income premium payers also often pay for costly health coverage designed to suit the economic interests and values of professional and other elites rather than their own. They also appear …

A Cautious Path Forward On Accountable Care Organizations, Barak D. Richman, Kevin A. Schulman

Faculty Scholarship

The wave of new Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), spurred by financial incentives in the Affordable Care Act, could become the latest chapter in the steady accumulation of market power by hospitals, health care systems, and physician groups. The main purpose behind forming many ACOs may not be to achieve cost savings but instead to strengthen negotiating power over purchasers in the private sector. This would be an unfortunate sequel to the waves of mergers in the 1990s when health care entities sought to counter market pressure from managed care organizations. The possibility that ACOs might further concentrate health care markets …

The Provider-Monopoly Problem In Health Care, Clark C. Havighurst, Barak D. Richman

Faculty Scholarship

Although federal judges have resisted giving due effect to standard antitrust principles in scrutinizing mergers of nonprofit hospitals, the presence of health insurance makes it especially important to oppose monopoly in health services markets. U.S.-style health insurance gives monopolist providers extraordinary pricing freedom, thus exacerbating monopoly’s usual redistributive effects. Significant allocative inefficiencies - albeit not the kind generally associated with monopoly - also result when the monopolist is a nonprofit hospital. Because it is probably impossible to undo past hospital mergers creating undue market power, we suggest some alternative remedies. One is to apply antitrust rules against "tying" arrangements so …

Four Constitutional Limits That The Minimum Coverage Provision Respects, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

Opponents of the minimum coverage provision in the Affordable Care Act charge that if Congress can require most people to obtain health insurance or pay a certain amount of money, then Congress can impose whatever mandates it wishes—or, at least, whatever purchase mandates it wishes. This Essay refutes that claim by identifying four limits on the Commerce Clause that the minimum coverage provision honors. Congress may not use its commerce power: (1) to regulate noneconomic subject matter; (2) to impose a regulation that violates constitutional rights, including the right to bodily integrity; (3) to regulate at all, including by imposing …

On The Constitutionality Of Health Care Reform, Barak D. Richman

Faculty Scholarship

This commentary describes the legal challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Fragmentation In Mental Health Benefits And Services: A Preliminary Examination Into Consumption And Outcomes, Barak D. Richman, Daniel Grossman, Frank Sloan

Faculty Scholarship

In this chapter, we examine consumption patterns and health outcomes within a health insurance system in which mental health benefits are administered under a carved-out insurance plan. Using a comprehensive dataset of health claims, including insurance claims for both mental and physical health services, we examine both heterogeneity of consumption and variation in outcomes. Consumption variation addresses the regularly overlooked question of how equal insurance and access does not translate into equitable consumption. Outcomes variation yields insights into the potential harms of disparate consumption and of uncoordinated care. We find that even when insurance and access are held constant, consumption …