Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:04:18.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Implementing Health Reform at the State Level: Access and Care for Vulnerable Populations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Extract

The Affordable Care Act1 (ACA) promises to improve access to coverage and care for two vulnerable groups: low-income persons who are excluded by a lack of resources and chronically ill and disabled people who are excluded by the dysfunction of our existing insurance and care delivery systems. ACA’s sprawling provisions raise a wealth of implementation challenges that are exacerbated by the compromises required to move reform through Congress. In particular, the compromise between regulatory/public program advocates and advocates for private, market-driven programs requires thoughtful regulatory coordination between public and private health systems.

Type
JLME Supplement
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111–148, amended by Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, Pub. L. No. 111–152, is commonly referred to as the Affordable Care Act.Google Scholar
See Congressional Budget Office, Letter from Peter Elmendorf to Nancy Pelosi, March 18, 2010, available at <http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11355/hr4872.pdf> (last visited December 10, 2010). The estimates in the letter did not take into account some small effects from the subsequent passage of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act.+(last+visited+December+10,+2010).+The+estimates+in+the+letter+did+not+take+into+account+some+small+effects+from+the+subsequent+passage+of+the+Health+Care+and+Education+Reconciliation+Act.>Google Scholar
See, Smith, V. et al., “Eliminating the Medicaid Asset Test for Families: A Review of State Experiences,” Kaiser Family Foundation, April 2001.Google Scholar
Sommers, B. D., “Why Millions of Children Eligible for Medicaid and SCHIP Are Uninsured: Poor Retention Versus Poor Take-Up,” Health Affairs 26 (2007): W560w567, at w563–w566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogan, M. D. et al., “Association between Underinsurance and Access to Care Among Children with Special Health Care Needs in the United States,” Pediatrics 116 (2005): 11621169, at 1165–1167; Warren, E., “Bankrupt Children,” Minnesota Law Review 86 (2002): 1003–1032, at 1020–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ACA, §2001(a)(2)(c); see, Letter from CMS State Medicaid Director, April 9, 2010, available at <https://www.cms.gov/smdl/downloads/SMD10005.pdf> (last visited December 10, 2010), specifying the services that states must cover in benchmark coverage. Those exempt from mandatory enrollment in a benchmark plan include people who qualify for Medicaid because of disability, the medically frail, those dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, certain low-income parents, pregnant women, women who qualify for Medicaid because of break or cervical cancer, children in foster care or receiving adoption assistance, the medically needy, and individuals receiving only emergency services; ACA, §2001(a)(2).+(last+visited+December+10,+2010),+specifying+the+services+that+states+must+cover+in+benchmark+coverage.+Those+exempt+from+mandatory+enrollment+in+a+benchmark+plan+include+people+who+qualify+for+Medicaid+because+of+disability,+the+medically+frail,+those+dually+eligible+for+Medicare+and+Medicaid,+certain+low-income+parents,+pregnant+women,+women+who+qualify+for+Medicaid+because+of+break+or+cervical+cancer,+children+in+foster+care+or+receiving+adoption+assistance,+the+medically+needy,+and+individuals+receiving+only+emergency+services;+ACA,+§2001(a)(2).>Google Scholar
42 C.F.R. § 440.330 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ACA, §§ 1311 and 10104.Google Scholar
ACA, §§ 1311(e)(1)(b) and 10104(f)(2).Google Scholar
Long, S. K. and Masi, P. B., “Access and Affordability: An Update on Health Reform in Massachusetts, Fall 2008,” Health Affairs 28 (2009): W578W587, at W582–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinbrook, R., “Easing the Shortage in Adult Primary Care - Is It All about Money?” New England Journal of Medicine 360 (2009): 26962699, at 2698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mundinger, M. O. et al., “Primary Care Outcomes in Patients Treated by Nurse Practitioners or Physicians,” JAMA 283 (2000): 5968, at 66–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dueker, M. J. et al., “The Practice Boundaries of Advanced Practice Nurses: An Economic and Legal Analysis,” The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, November 2005, available at <https://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/2005/2005–071.pdf> (last visited December 10, 2010); Nolan, L. et al., “The Effects of State Dental Practice Laws Allowing Alternative Models of Preventive Oral Health Care Delivery to Low Income Children,” George Washington University Center for Health Services Research and Policy, January 17, 2003, available at <http://www.gwumc.edu/sphhs/departments/healthpolicy/chpr/downloads/Oral_Health.pdf> (last visited December 10, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kane, R. L. et al., Meeting the Challenge of Chronic Illness (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005): at 46–61.Google Scholar
Mann, Cindy, Director CMS, State Medicaid Director Letter #10–015 (August 6, 2010), available at <http://www.cms.gov.smdl/downloads/SMD10015.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Benedict, R. E., “Disparities in Use of and Unmet Need for Therapeutic and Supportive Services among School-Age Children with Functional Limitations: A Comparison Across Settings,” Health Services Research 41 (2006): 103124, at 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar