Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Unintended Federalism Consequences Of The Affordable Care Act’S Insurance Market Reforms, Joshua Phares Ackerman
The Unintended Federalism Consequences Of The Affordable Care Act’S Insurance Market Reforms, Joshua Phares Ackerman
Pace Law Review
This Article, which is the first to examine the relationship between the ACA’s insurance market reforms and state regulation of insurance, argues that states’ decisions to forego creating their own exchanges may mark the beginning of an important shift of regulatory authority from the states to the federal government. It begins by sketching the historical antecedents of the current allocation of state and federal authority over insurance regulation. The aim of this discussion is to highlight the unique role states play in the regulation of insurance as opposed to other financial products. Part III explains the pre-ACA structure of health …
Building A Better Laboratory: The Federal Role In Promoting Health System Experimentation, Kristin Madison
Building A Better Laboratory: The Federal Role In Promoting Health System Experimentation, Kristin Madison
Pepperdine Law Review
While expanding federal involvement in the health care system, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) preserves states' roles as policy laboratories and private providers' roles as health care delivery laboratories. State-based and provider-based laboratories suffer from many shortcomings, however, as mechanisms to develop, evaluate, and facilitate diffusion of reforms within the health system. This Article argues that the federal government can take steps to address these shortcomings. It first briefly reviews ACA provisions that promote policy and delivery experimentation. It then suggests that by tying funding to policy outcomes, making use of regulatory variation and regulatory menus, and …
Chief Justice John “Marshall” Roberts—How The Chief Justice’S Majority Opinion Upholding The Federal Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act Of 2010 Evokes Chief Justice Marshall’S Decision In Marbury V. Madison, Akram Faizer
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
[Excerpt] “The United States Supreme Court sustained the Federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 based on Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.’s majority opinion in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. The decision was feted by President Obama, liberal politicians, activists, and citizens who feared the Supreme Court would use its judicial review powers to invalidate the signature achievement of the United States’ forty-fourth President. Unsurprisingly, the decision disappointed many conservatives, who expected the Court to exercise its judicial review power to invalidate what is arguably the most important and ambitious piece of federal social welfare …