Can States Take Over Health Care?

A new report shows how states can lower health costs and deliver care better than the federal government.

US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Mike Leavitt speaks during a news conference in the heavily fortified Green Zone area in Baghdad on October 20, 2008. The official spoke about the US-Iraqi relations in the field of health and humanitarian aid. AFP PHOTO/POOL/ALI ABBAS 
National Journal
Sophie Novack
Jan. 9, 2014, 4:55 a.m.

Fed­er­al health care spend­ing has been get­ting all the at­ten­tion, but it’s the states that are best equipped to re­form the sys­tem and con­tain costs, says a new re­port or­gan­ized by the Uni­versity of Vir­gin­ia’s Miller Cen­ter.

The re­port — fun­ded by Kais­er Per­man­ente and the Robert Wood John­son Found­a­tion — out­lines meas­ures states can take to im­prove care and re­duce cost. Ac­cord­ing to the con­trib­ut­ors, states have unique tools to take the lead in ad­dress­ing the is­sues with the U.S. health care sys­tem in ways the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment can­not.

“The grid­lock in Wash­ing­ton will in­ev­it­ably chan­nel these prob­lems to a place that can find a solu­tion,” said Mike Leav­itt, the former U.S. Health and Hu­man Ser­vices sec­ret­ary and a former gov­ernor of Utah who co­chaired the State Health Care Cost Con­tain­ment Com­mis­sion, which put to­geth­er the re­port. “The eco­nom­ic im­per­at­ive to find these solu­tions is far big­ger than the Af­ford­able Care Act, or any­thing hap­pen­ing in Wash­ing­ton. The ques­tion is how chaot­ic is it, or how or­derly is it? States will be a place where or­der will be found, ul­ti­mately be­fore Wash­ing­ton.”

Former Col­or­ado Gov. Bill Ritter is the oth­er com­mis­sion co­chair.

The au­thors de­scribe five im­port­ant “policy levers” that states pos­sess to in­flu­ence the way care is priced and de­livered. States con­trol gov­ern­ment-sponsored health pro­grams like Medi­caid and CHIP, health in­sur­ance ex­changes, and state em­ploy­ee health be­ne­fits; have au­thor­ity over in­sur­ance, pro­vider rates, and med­ic­al mal­prac­tice; can set an­ti­trust laws and re­quire plans to provide trans­par­ent cost and qual­ity in­form­a­tion to con­sumers; can pro­mote pop­u­la­tion health through pub­lic health ini­ti­at­ives; and have the abil­ity, through gov­ernors, to en­gage vari­ous stake­hold­ers in find­ing solu­tions.

This fi­nal lever is em­phas­ized as one of the most im­port­ant. “In the past, this hasn’t been a place gov­ernors have played a lead­er­ship role,” said Robert Re­is­chauer, Medi­care trust­ee and former dir­ect­or of the Con­gres­sion­al Budget Of­fice, and a mem­ber of the com­mis­sion. “[But] this is an op­por­tun­ity that only gov­ernors have as lead­ers and con­veners.”

The unique abil­ity of gov­ernors to gath­er stake­hold­ers to find col­lab­or­at­ive solu­tions is the first in the com­mit­tee’s sev­en re­com­mend­a­tions to states, and gen­er­ally ac­know­ledged as the crit­ic­al first step to achiev­ing the oth­ers.

The six oth­er re­com­mend­a­tions for the states are col­lect data to cre­ate a health care pro­file; set stand­ards and goals for spend­ing and qual­ity; use ex­ist­ing pro­grams such as Medi­caid and the ex­changes as lever­age to ac­cel­er­ate co­ordin­ated, risk-based care; in­crease trans­par­ency of plans to im­prove con­sumer in­form­a­tion and mar­ket com­pet­i­tion; re­form reg­u­la­tions like med­ic­al mal­prac­tice and scope of prac­tice to in­crease ef­fi­ciency; pro­mote pop­u­la­tion health and per­son­al re­spons­ib­il­ity through edu­ca­tion and well­ness pro­grams.

The re­port’s con­trib­ut­ors em­phas­ize these changes are a long-term pro­cess, with a five- to 10-year ho­ri­zon. Each state will need to de­cide how to im­ple­ment changes and de­term­ine its own bal­ance between gov­ern­ment over­sight and reg­u­la­tion and mar­ket in­nov­a­tion.

Al­though the ACA is seen as a na­tion­al health care over­haul, the way the law has rolled out has placed great deal of re­spons­ib­il­ity on states, blur­ring the line between the fed­er­al and state role in man­aging care.

“As the ACA has evolved, we’ve watched as states made the in­di­vidu­al de­cision to per­haps take a dif­fer­ent path, wheth­er they’ve ad­op­ted to ex­pand Medi­caid or not, or run their own ex­changes or not,” said com­mit­tee mem­ber An­drew Drey­fus, pres­id­ent and chief ex­ec­ut­ive of­ficer of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Mas­sachu­setts. “Some of the na­tion­al stand­ard­iz­a­tion an­ti­cip­ated in the ACA has not come to pass at the same level, which I think has put a much great­er fo­cus on states as the locus of ac­count­ab­il­ity for health care.”

Leav­itt says the re­port was writ­ten not only for state of­fi­cials but for the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion as well. For states to take more of the reins in health care, the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment needs to loosen them.

“We have seen real­ity set in on the ad­min­is­tra­tion and those im­ple­ment­ing the ACA, and that is how lim­ited their ca­pa­city is to im­ple­ment a na­tion­al strategy,” he said. “The ad­min­is­tra­tion over time has be­gun to grant great­er flex­ib­il­ity to states in or­der to in­centiv­ize as many as pos­sible to be­come in­volved.”

Leav­itt points to the es­sen­tial health be­ne­fits and the Arkan­sas Medi­caid waiver as ex­amples of the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment grant­ing flex­ib­il­ity to states in how to im­ple­ment ACA pro­vi­sions.

“If you’re go­ing to have na­tion­al stand­ards, then neigh­bor­hood solu­tions is the way you im­ple­ment those. The more you can provide flex­ib­il­ity, the more ef­fect­ive the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment will be.”

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
16 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
17 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
18 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
20 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
22 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×