A model of factors determining levels of public support for health care policy in the United States

Public preferences for policy are formed in a little-understood process that is not adequately described by traditional economic theory of choice. In this paper I suggest that U.S. aggregate support for health reform can be modeled as tradeoffs among a small number of behavioral values and the stage of policy development. The theory underlying the model is based on Samuelson, et al.'s (1986) work and Wilke's (1991) elaboration of it as the Greed/Efficiency/Fairness (GEF) hypothesis of motivation in the management of resource dilemmas, and behavioral economics informed by Kahneman and Thaler's prospect theory. ^ The model developed in this paper employs ordered probit econometric techniques applied to data derived from U.S. polls taken from 1990 to mid-2003 that measured support for health reform proposals. Outcome data are four-tiered Likert counts; independent variables are dummies representing the presence or absence of operationalizations of each behavioral variable, along with an integer representing policy process stage. Marginal effects of each independent variable predict how support levels change on triggering that variable. Model estimation results indicate a vanishingly small likelihood that all coefficients are zero and all variables have signs expected from model theory. ^ Three hypotheses were tested: support will drain from health reform policy as it becomes increasingly well-articulated and approaches enactment; reforms appealing to fairness through universal health coverage will enjoy a higher degree of support than those targeted more narrowly; health reforms calling for government operation of the health finance system will achieve lower support than those that do not. Model results support the first and last hypotheses. Contrary to expectations, universal health care proposals did not provide incremental support beyond those targeted to “deserving” populations—children, elderly, working families. In addition, loss of autonomy (e.g. restrictions on choice of care giver) is found to be the “third rail” of health reform with significantly-reduced support. When applied to a hypothetical health reform in which an employer-mandated Medical Savings Account policy is the centerpiece, the model predicts support that may be insufficient to enactment. These results indicate that the method developed in the paper may prove valuable to health policy designers. ^

Government initiatives to expand access to employer-based health insurance

Employer-based health insurance is declining at records rates, which leaves an increasing number of people without access to affordable health insurance. As a result, municipalities are experiencing financial difficulties to provide health care services for their growing uninsured population. In attempt to combat this issue, three health polices have emerged within the last ten years, called Living Wage with a health insurance provision, Pay or Play, and Health Care Preference. These policies are gaining popularity as civic leaders recognize their ability to promote a public health goal by leveraging the power of city and county contracts to include a health insurance component in the competitive bidding practice for government contracts. ^ This is the first paper to conduct a retrospective analysis on whether these three health policies have been able to increase access to employer-based health insurance and/or support the local health care safety net based on the experiences of six municipalities over a 5-year period from 2001-2006. Although there was variation between the effectiveness of the policies, all three demonstrated success in that a number of contractors extended existing health insurance to employees not previously covered and the increased cost of contracting for the local government was, on average, less than 1 percent of the total operating budget. ^

Use of a modified delphi process for establishing occupational exposure limits in support of health surveillance for space travelers

On-orbit exposures can come from numerous factors related to the space environment as evidenced by almost 50 years of environmental samples collected for water analysis, air analysis, radiation analysis, and physiologic parameters. For astronauts and spaceflight participants the occupational exposures can be very different from those experienced by workers performing similar tasks in workplaces on Earth, because the duration of the exposure could be continuous for very long orbital, and eventually interplanetary, missions. The establishment of long-term exposure standards is vital to controlling the quality of the spacecraft environment over long periods. NASA often needs to update and revise its prior exposure standards (Spacecrafts Maximum Allowable Concentrations (SMACs)). Traditional standards-setting processes are often lengthy, so a more rapid method to review and establish standards would be a substantial advancement in this area. This project investigates use of the Delphi method for this purpose. ^ In order to achieve the objectives of this study a modified Delphi methodology was tested in three trials executed by doctoral students and a panel of experts in disciplines related to occupational safety and health. During each test/trial modifications were made to the methodology. Prior to submission of the Delphi Questionnaire to the panel of experts a pilot study/trial was conducted using five doctoral students with the goals of testing and adjusting the Delphi questionnaire to improve comprehension, work out any procedural issues and evaluate the effectiveness of the questionnaire in drawing the desired responses. The remainder of the study consisted of two trials of the Modified Delphi process using 6 chemicals that currently have the potential of causing occupational exposures to NASA astronauts or spaceflight participants. To assist in setting Occupational Exposure Limits (OEL), the expert panel was established consisting of experts from academia, government and industry. Evidence was collected and used to create close-ended questionnaires which were submitted to the Delphi panel of experts for the establishment of OEL values for three chemicals from the list of six originally selected (trial 1). Once the first Delphi trial was completed, adjustments were made to the Delphi questionnaires and the process above was repeated with the remaining 3 chemicals (trial 2). ^ Results indicate that experience in occupational safety and health and with OEL methodologies can have a positive effect in minimizing the time experts take in completing this process. Based on the results of the questionnaires and comparison of the results with the SMAC already established by NASA, we conclude that use of the Delphi methodology is appropriate for use in the decision-making process for the selection of OELs.^