Financing, Role of Preventive Care in Reform Still Unresolved

Financing, Role of Preventive Care in Reform Still Unresolved

A new paper raises questions about Americans' willingness to accept income tax hikes to fund expanded health insurance coverage. The research will increase pressure on lawmakers, who also are being hit with increased pressure to elevate the role of preventive care in reform legislation.

The dog days of August have taken President Obama to Montana and Colorado to stump for Democratic proposals to overhaul the health care system and fight back against criticism of the proposals.

But because neither the Senate nor the House has approved a bill, there are still a lot of questions about the effort, not the least of which is how it would be funded.

A Health Affairs Web exclusive published Aug. 18 indicates that Americans support health care reform but aren’t willing to shoulder federal income tax increases to cover the cost of a Medicaid expansion, subsidies for low-income people or subsidies for people with chronic illnesses.

Daniel Kessler and David Brady of Stanford’s Hoover Institution authored the paper, which is based on a January survey.  They write that the recession might have colored survey respondents’ answers and held out the possibility that people might be more willing to pay higher taxes for health care reform in more prosperous times.

Moreover, Kessler and Brady acknowledge that public support for financing health care reform might differ from their findings depending on the approach that Congress ultimately chooses.

Some supporters of Democratic health care reform proposals assert that greater use of preventive care and wellness would help make people healthier and curb health care cost increases, but the evidence doesn’t necessarily support that contention.

In a letter to Rep. Nathan Deal (R-Ga.), Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf cited research from the New England Journal of Medicine and other sources indicating that more widespread use of preventive care likely would increase federal health care spending, rather than cut expenditures.

Elmendorf wrote that experts nonetheless concluded that greater use of preventive care should be labeled “cost-effective” because the clinical benefits exceed the jump in costs. 

Taking a page from that argument, the California Endowment, Kaiser Permanente and four other health foundations called for prevention to occupy a central role in health care reform efforts. 

We won’t know until next month what role lawmakers will carve for prevention in a health care reform proposal.  In the meantime, here’s a rundown on the week’s reform news. 

Administration’s Message

What’s In the Proposal

Shaping the Debate

Exit mobile version