Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons^™

Review Of "Experiencing Politics" By John E. Mcdonough, Robert B. Hackey

Health Policy & Management Faculty Publications

Reviews the book 'Experiencing Politics: A Legislator's Stories of Government and Health Care,' by John E. McDonough.

Making Sense Of Medicaid Reform, Robert B. Hackey

Health Policy & Management Faculty Publications

Reviews the books 'Medicaid Reform and the American States: Case Studies of Managed Care,' by Mark Daniels and 'Remaking Medicaid: Managed Care for the Public Good,' by Stephen Davidson and Stephen Somers.

The Politics Of Reform, Robert B. Hackey

Health Policy & Management Faculty Publications

Comments on the implication of individual health insurance market reform for policy making in the United States. Role of competitive markets in promoting access to health care; Notion on the rejection of enrollment and rating claims; Effectiveness of incremental reforms in limiting discrimination against high-risk subscribers.

Groping For Autonomy: The Federal Government And American Hospitals, Robert B. Hackey

Health Policy & Management Faculty Publications

This article chronicles the slow but steady emergence of countervailing power in the hospital industry since mid-century. The transformation of American health care policymaking reflects the federal government's growing fiscal obligations as the single largest purchaser of health care. As John Kenneth Galbraith [1956,113] notes, "Power on one side of a market creates both the need for, and the prospect of reward to, the exercise of countervailing power from the other side." The federal government's effort to exercise countervailing power over health care providers shows no sign of abating in the future, for Medicare and Medicaid costs threaten the stability …

Institutional Design And Regulatory Performance: Rethinking State Certificate Of Need Programs, Robert B. Hackey, Peter F. Fuller

Health Policy & Management Faculty Publications

The success of state efforts to control rising health care costs depends on the incentives contained in the legislative design of regulatory policies and in the administrative capacity and autonomy of state agencies. States have regulated the construction and expansion of health care facilities and services for more that two decades through “certificate of need” (CON) programs designed to limit the diffusion of expensive new medical technologies and to avoid the duplication of health care facilities. Although the cost-control record of state certificate of need programs has been widely criticized, Rhode Island’s experience with a reformed CON process from 1985 …

The Politics Of Trauma System Development, Robert B. Hackey

Health Policy & Management Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Regulatory Regimes And State Cost Containment Programs, Robert B. Hackey

Health Policy & Management Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

New Wine In Old Bottles: Certificate Of Need Enters The 1990s, Robert B. Hackey

Health Policy & Management Faculty Publications

Although state certificate- of-need (CON) programs have been the subject of intense criticism over the past decade, recent evidence suggests that CON programs may be more effective than commonly believed. While many state programs have yielded disappointing results, the CON process can also be used to achieve other important policy objectives, such as increasing access to care for the uninsured and increasing lay participation in health policy planning. In sum, rather than fading away after the termination of federal support for health planning in 1986, state CON programs are poised to assume new roles during the 1990s.

The Illogic Of Health Care Reform: Policy Dilemmas For The 1990s, Robert B. Hackey

Health Policy & Management Faculty Publications

After more than a half century, supporters of health care reform now argue that the passage of national health insurance is "inevitable," for all of the major players in the health care policy arena-physicians, insurers, hospitals, and the mass public-are now favorably disposed toward reform. Periods of optimism are not new in health care debates in the U.S., but in each such era (in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1970s), reform efforts fell victim to ideological fissures in Congress, an overabundance of reform proposals, intense conflicts over what a new health care system should look like, and wavering support from the …