Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Inching Toward Universal Coverage: State-Federal Health-Care Programs in Historical Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2015

Simon F. Haeder
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin–Madison
David L. Weimer
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin–Madison
Corresponding

Abstract

Image of the first page of this article
Type
Critical Perspective
Copyright
Copyright © Donald Critchlow and Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

1. See, for example, Amenta, Edwin et al., “Bring Back the WPA: Work, Relief, and the Origins of American Social Policy in Welfare Reform,” Studies in American Political Development 12, no. 1 (1998): 156Google Scholar; Glenn, Brian J., “Fraternal Rhetoric and the Development of the U.S. Welfare State,” Studies in American Political Development 15, no. 2 (2001): 220–33Google Scholar; Johnson, Kimberley S. “Racial Orders, Congress, and the Agricultural Welfare State, 1865–1940,” Studies in American Political Development 25 (2011): 143–61Google Scholar; Skocpol, Theda and Ritter, Gretchen, “Gender and the Origins of Modern Social Policies in Britain and the United States,” Studies in American Political Development 5, no. 1 (1991): 3693Google Scholar; Mettler, Suzanne, Dividing Citizens: Gender and Federalism in New Deal Policy (Ithaca, 1998)Google Scholar; Skocpol, Theda, Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The Political Origins of Social Policy in the United States (Cambridge, Mass., 1992).Google Scholar

2. Johnson, Kimberley S., Governing the American State: Congress and the New Federalism, 1877–1929 (Princeton, 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Haeder, Simon F. and Weimer, David L., “You Can’t Make Me Do It, but I Could Be Persuaded: A Federalism Perspective on the Affordable Care Act,” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law (forthcoming).Google Scholar

4. Mountin, Joseph W. and Greve, Clifford H., “The Role of Grants-in-Aid in Financing Public Health Programs,” in Public Health Bulletin (Washington, D.C., 1949)Google Scholar; Brooke Graves, W., American Intergovernmetal Relations: Their Origins, Historical Development, and Current Status (New York, 1964).Google Scholar

5. Bittermann, Henry J., State and Federal Grants-in-Aid (New York, 1938)Google Scholar; Graves, American Intergovernmetal Relations.

6. The Council of State Governments, Federal Grants-in-Aid: Report to the Committee on Federal Grants-in-Aid (1949).Google Scholar

7. Key, V. O. Jr., The Administration of Federal Grants to States (Chicago, 1937).Google Scholar

8. Ibid.

9. Lapp, John A., “Federal Grants in Aid,” American Political Science Review 10, no. 4 (1916): 738–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10. Johnson, , “Racial Orders, Congress, and the Agricultural Welfare State, 1865–1940.”Google Scholar

11. Lapp, , “Federal Grants in Aid”Google Scholar; Mountin, and Greve, , “The Role of Grants-in-Aid in Financing Public Health Programs.”Google Scholar

12. Maxwell, James A., The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States (Cambridge, Mass., 1946).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13. Johnson, , Governing the American State.Google Scholar

14. Mountin, and Greve, , “The Role of Grants-in-Aid in Financing Public Health Programs.”Google Scholar

15. Clark, Jane Perry, The Rise of a New Federalism: Federal-State Cooperation in the United States (New York, 1938).Google Scholar

16. Douglas, Paul H., “The Development of a System of Federal Grants-in-Aid I,” Political Science Quarterly 35, no. 2 (1920): 255–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Douglas, , “The Development of a System of Federal Grants-in-Aid II,” Political Science Quarterly 35, no. 4 (1920): 522–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17. The Council of State Governments, Federal Grants-in-Aid: Report to the Committee on Federal Grants-in-Aid.

18. Douglas, “The Development of a System of Federal Grants-in-Aid I”; Douglas, “The Development of a System of Federal Grants-in-Aid II.”

19. Withdrawal occurred in 1934 for Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, 1938 for Massachusetts, and again in 1940 for Georgia. New Jersey did not restore diversions. See Maxwell, The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States.

20. Douglas, “The Development of a System of Federal Grants-in-Aid I”; “The Development of a System of Federal Grants-in-Aid II.”

21. Chapman, Carleton B. and Talmadge, John M., “Historical and Political Background of Federal Health Care Legislation,” Law and Contemporary Problems 35, no. 2 (1970): 334–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22. Davis, Michael M., Public Medical Services: A Survey of Tax-Supported Medical Care in the United States (Chicago, 1937).Google Scholar

23. Furman, Bess, A Profile of the United States Public Health Service 1798–1948 (Washington, D.C., 1974)Google Scholar; Mullan, Fitzhugh, Plagues and Politics: The Story of the United States Public Health Service (New York, 1989)Google Scholar; Duffy, John, The Sanitarians: A History of American Public Health (Urbana, 1990).Google Scholar

24. Falk, I. S., “National Health Insurance for the United States,” Public Health Reports 92, no. 5 (1977): 399406. It was replaced with direct governmental relief in 1884. See Maxwell, The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States. This program later developed in the U.S. Public Health Service.Google Scholar

25. Chapman, and Talmadge, , “Historical and Political Background of Federal Health Care Legislation.”Google Scholar

26. Howard, Oliver O., Report of the Commissioner, Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands (Washington, D.C., 1869)Google Scholar; Peirce, Paul S., The Freedmen’s Bureau: A Chapter in the History of Reconstruction (Iowa City, 1904)Google Scholar; Bentley, George R., A History of the Freedmen’s Bureau (Philadelphia, 1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Downs, Jim, Sick from Freedom: African-American Illness and Suffering During the Civil War and Reconstruction (New York, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27. Perkins, John A., “Grants-in-Aid Reappraised,” Public Health Reports (1896–1970) 73, no. 1 (1958): 2730; Maxwell, The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28. Gordon, Linda, “Social Insurance and Public Assistance: The Influence of Gender in Welfare Thought in the United States, 1890–1935,” American Historical Review 97, no. 1 (1992): 1954CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Link, Arthur S., “What Happened to the Progressive Movement in the 1920’s?” American Historical Review 64, no. 4 (1959): 833–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stanley Lemons, J., “The Sheppard-Towner Act: Progressivism in the 1920s,” Journal of American History 55, no. 4 (1969): 776–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ladd-Taylor, Molly, “‘Grannies’ and ‘Spinsters’: Midwife Education under the Sheppard-Towner Act,” Journal of Social History 22, no. 2 (1988): 255–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Moehling, Carolyn M. and Thomasson, Melissa A., “The Political Economy of Saving Mothers and Babies: The Politics of State Participation in the Sheppard-Towner Program,” Journal of Economic History 72, no. 1 (2012): 75103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29. Velsor-Friedrich, Barbara, “Health and Welfare Reform, Part 1: The Origins,” Journal of Pediatric Nursing 11, no. 1 (1996): 6263 at 62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30. Chepaitis, Joseph B., “Federal Social Welfare Progressivism in the 1920s,” Social Service Review 46, no. 2 (1972): 213–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31. Ladd-Taylor, Molly, “‘Why Does Congress Wish Women and Children to Die?’: The Rise and Fall of Public Maternal and Infant Health Care in the United States, 1921–1929,” in Women and Children First: International Maternal and Infant Welfare 1870– 1945, ed. Fildes, Valerie, Marks, Lara, and Marland, Hilary (London, 1992).Google Scholar

32. Macdonald, Austin F., Federal Aid: A Study of the American Subsidy System (New York, 1928). Lemons, “The Sheppard-Towner Act: Progressivism in the 1920s.” Ironically, Massachusetts received funding from a total of twenty-two federal grant programs at the time of the lawsuit.Google Scholar

33. Siefert, Kristine, “An Exemplar of Primary Prevention in Social Work: The Sheppard-Towner Act of 1921,” Social Work in Health Care 90, no. 1 (1983): 87103. Chepaitis, “Federal Social Welfare Progressivism in the 1920s.”CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34. Children’s Bureau, Four Decades of Action for Children: Short History of the Children’s Bureau (Washington, D.C., 1956).Google Scholar

35. Lenroot, Katharine F., “Maternal and Child Welfare Provisions of the Social Security Act,” Law and Contemporary Problems 3, no. 2 (1936): 253–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36. Meckel, Richard A., Save the Babies: American Public Health Reform and the Prevention of Infant Mortality 1850–1929 (Baltimore, 1990).Google Scholar

37. Bittermann, State and Federal Grants-in-Aid.

38. Meckel, Save the Babies.

39. Macdonald, Austin F., “Recent Trends in Federal Aid to the States,” American Political Science Review 25, no. 3 (1931): 628–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

40. Chepaitis, “Federal Social Welfare Progressivism in the 1920s.”

41. Macdonald, “Recent Trends in Federal Aid to the States.”

42. Highway funding accounted for $150 million of this. See Harris, Joseph P., “The Future of Federal Grants-in-Aid,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 207 (1940): 1426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

43. American Public Welfare Association, Medical Care for the Unemployed and Their Families under the Plan of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (Chicago, 1934)Google Scholar; Chapin Brown, Josephine, Public Relief, 1929–1939 (New York, 1940)Google Scholar; Macmahon, Arthur W., Millett, John D., and Ogden, Gladys, The Administration of Federal Work Relief (New York, 1941; 1971).Google Scholar

44. Greenfield, Margaret, Medical Care for Welfare Recipients: Basic Problems (Berkeley, 1958).Google Scholar

45. Ibid.

46. Ibid., 25; American Public Welfare Association, Medical Care for the Unemployed and Their Families under the Plan of the Federal Emergency Relief AdministrationGoogle Scholar.

47. Greenfield, Medical Care for Welfare Recipients, 25.

48. Maxwell, The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States; American Public Welfare Association, Medical Care for the Unemployed and Their Families under the Plan of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration.

49. Terris, Milton, “Medical Care, the Needy, and the Medically Needy,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 273 (1951): 8492 at 86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

50. Greenfield, Medical Care for Welfare Recipients, 25.

51. Kerwin Williams, J. and Williams, Edward A., “New Techniques in Federal Aid,” American Political Science Review 34, no. 5 (1940): 947–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

52. Maxwell, , The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States. Clark, The Rise of a New Federalism, 250–53.Google Scholar

53. Maxwell, The Fiscal Impact of Federalism in the United States.

54. Clark, , The Rise of a New Federalism, 258.Google Scholar

55. Bittermann, , State and Federal Grants-in-Aid, 435.Google Scholar

56. Gaer, Joseph, Toward Farm Security: The Problem of Rural Poverty and the Work of the Farm Security Administration (Washington, D.C., 1941).Google Scholar

57. Mertz, Paul E., New Deal and Southern Rural Poverty (Baton Rouge, 1978)Google Scholar; Summers, Mary, “The New Deal Farm Programs: Looking for Reconstruction in American Agriculture,” Agricultural History 74, no. 2 (2000): 241–57.Google Scholar

58. Grey, Michael R., New Deal Medicine: The Rural Health Programs of the Farm Security Administration (Baltimore, 1999)Google Scholar; Grey, , “The Medical Care Programs of the Farm Security Administration, 1932 through 1947: A Rehearsal for National Health Insurance?” American Journal of Public Health 84, no. 10 (1994): 1678–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gaer, , Toward Farm Security; U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Rural Relief and Rehabilitation under the Farm Security Administration (Washington, D.C., 1942)Google Scholar; Farm Security Administration, Report of the Administrator of the Farm Security Administration 1939 (Washington, D.C., 1939); Report of the Administrator of the Farm Security Administration 1940 (Washington, D.C., 1940)Google Scholar; Resettlement Administration, Report of the Administrator of the Resettlement Administration, 1937 (Washington, D.C., 1937)Google Scholar; Maddox, James G., “The Farm Security Administration” (Cambridge, Mass., 1950).Google Scholar

59. Grey, “The Medical Care Programs of the Farm Security Administration; Williams, Ralph C., “The Medical Care Program for Farm Security Administration Borrowers,” Law and Contemporary Problems 6, no. 4 (1939): 583–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

60. “The Medical Care Program for Farm Security Administration Borrowers.”

61. Lubbell, Samuel and Everett, Walter, “Rehearsal for State Medicine,” Saturday Evening Post, 17 December 1938.Google Scholar

62. Grey, New Deal Medicine.

63. Dutton, Paul V., Differential Diagnoses: A Comparative History of Health Care Problems and Solutions in the United States and France (Ithaca, 2007).Google Scholar

64. Williams, “The Medical Care Program for Farm Security Administration Borrowers”; Grey, “The Medical Care Programs of the Farm Security Administration.”

65. Williams, “The Medical Care Program of the Farm Security Administration.”

66. Farm Security Administration, Greenbelt Communities (Washington, D.C., 1940).Google Scholar

67. Mott, Frederick D. and Roemer, Milton I., “A Federal Program of Public Health and Medical Services for Migratory Farm Workers,” Public Health Reports (1896–1970) 60, no. 9 (1945): 229–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Williams, Ralph C., “Nursing Care for Migrant Families,” American Journal of Nursing 41, no. 9 (1941): 1028–32Google Scholar; Grey, , “The Medical Care Programs of the Farm Security Administration”Google Scholar; Grey, Michael R., “Dustbowls, Disease, and the New Deal:The Farm Security Administration Migrant Health Programs, 1935–1947,” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 48, no. 1 (1993): 339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

68. Williams, “Nursing Care for Migrant Families”; Mott and Roemer, “A Federal Program of Public Health and Medical Services for Migratory Farm Workers.”

69. Rasmussen, Wayne D., A History of the Emergency Farm Labor Supply Program, 1943–1947 (Washington, D.C., 1951).Google Scholar

70. Mott, and Roemer, , “A Federal Program of Public Health and Medical Services for Migratory Farm Workers”Google Scholar; McConnell, Grant, The Decline of Agrarian Democracy (Berkeley, 1959).Google Scholar

71. For an overview, see Witte, Edwin E., “Old Age Security in the Social Security Act,” Journal of Political Economy 45, no. 1 (1937): 144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

72. Greenfield, , Medical Care for Welfare Recipients, 2532.Google Scholar

73. Stuart, Harold C., “Progress of Public Health as It Relates to the Child,” Journal of Pediatrics 6, no. 6 (1935): 839–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

74. Lenroot, “Maternal and Child Welfare Provisions of the Social Security Act.”

75. Mushkin, Selma J., “Medical Services and the Social Security Act Amendments of 1950,” Public Health Reports 66, no. 4 (1951): 98114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

76. Derthick, Martha, The Influence of Federal Grants: Public Assistance in Massachusetts (Cambridge, Mass., 1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

77. Mitchell, W. L., “Social Security and Public Health,” Public Health Reports (1896–1970) 73, no. 1 (1958): 3438CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Moore, Judith D. and Smith, David G., “Legislating Medicaid: Considering Medicaid and Its Origins,” Health Care Financing Review 27, no. 2 (2005): 4552.Google Scholar

78. Kramer, Lucy M., “Highlights of the Social Security Amendments of 1958,” Public Health Reports (1896–1970) 74, no. 1 (1959): 6776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

79. Reed, Kathlyn L., “History of Federal Legislation for Persons with Disabilities,” American Journal of Occupational Therapy 46, no. 5 (1992): 397408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

80. Berkowitz, Edward D., “The American Disability System in Historical Perspective,” in Disability Policies and Government Programs, ed. Berkowitz, Edward D. (New York, 1979)Google Scholar; Berkowitz, , Rehabilitation: The Federal Government’s Response to Disability, 1935–1954 (New York, 1980).Google Scholar

81. “The American Disability System in Historical Perspective.”

82. Sherry, Mark, “Barden–La Follette Act,” in Encyclopedia of American Disability History, ed. Burch, Susan (New York, 2009)Google Scholar; McCahill, William P., “Placement of Handicapped Workers,” Monthly Labor Review 67, no. 3 (1948): 282–85Google Scholar; Reed, , “History of Federal Legislation for Persons with Disabilities”Google Scholar; Howard Rusk, A., “Rehabilitation in Operation,” Southern Medical Journal 41, no. 1 (1948): 5762CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mott, Frederick D. and Roemer, Milton I., Rural Health and Medical Care (New York, 1948)Google Scholar; MacDonald, Mary, Federal Grants for Vocational Rehabilitation (Chicago, 1944)Google Scholar; Berkowitz, Edward D., “The Federal Government and the Emergence of Rehabilitation Medicine,” Historian 43, no. 4 (1981): 530–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

83. Kimberly, John R., “Environmental Constraints and Organizational Structure: A Comparative Analysis of Rehabilitation Organizations,” Administrative Science Quarterly 20, no. 1 (1975): 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

84. Sherry, “Barden–La Follette Act”; Reed, “History of Federal Legislation for Persons with Disabilities”; Berkowitz, “The American Disability System in Historical Perspective.”

85. Sinai, Nathan and Anderson, Odin W., EMIC (Emergency Maternity and Infant Care): A Study of Administrative Experience (Ann Arbor, 1948).Google Scholar

86. Dutton, Differential Diagnoses; Sinai and Anderson, EMIC (Emergency Maternity and Infant Care).

87. Berger, Harriet F., “Contract Care for Indigent Mothers in Philadelphia,” Public Health Reports (1896–1970) 75, no. 4 (1960): 365–68; Sinai and Anderson, EMIC (Emergency Maternity and Infant Care).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

88. Velsor-Friedrich, , “Health and Welfare Reform, Part 1: The Origins”; Dutton, Differential Diagnoses; Sinai and Anderson, EMIC (Emergency Maternity and Infant Care)Google Scholar.

89. Brewster, Agnes W., Health Insurance and Related Proposals for Financing Personal Health Services: A Digest of Major Legislation and Proposals for Federal Action, 1935–1957 (Washington, D.C., 1958).Google Scholar

90. Richard Brown, E., Public Medicine in Crisis: Public Hospitals in California (Berkeley, 1981), 11.Google Scholar

91. Ibid.

92. Mott and Roemer, Rural Health and Medical Care.

93. Peterson, Chris L., “Medicaid: The Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP)” (Washington, D.C., 2010)Google Scholar; U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging, State Action to Implement Medical Programs for the Aged (Washington, D.C., 1961)Google Scholar; Performance of the States: Eighteen Months of Experience with the Medical Assistance for the Aged (Kerr-Mills) Program (Washington, D.C., 1962).Google Scholar

94. Richard Brown, E., “Medicare and Medicaid: The Process, Value, and Limits of Health Care Reforms,” Journal of Public Health Policy 4, no. 3 (1983): 335–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

95. Fine, Sidney, “The Kerr-Mills Act: Medical Care for the Indigent in Michigan, 1960–1965,” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 53, no. 3 (1998): 285316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

96. Ibid.

97. Moore, and Smith, , “Legislating Medicaid: Considering Medicaid and Its Origins.” U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Health of the Elderly, “Medical Assistance for the Aged: The Kerr-Mills Program 1960–1963” (Washington, D.C., 1963).Google Scholar97 U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Health of the Elderly, “Medical Assistance for the Aged”Google Scholar; Haeder, and Weimer, , “You Can’t Make Me Do It, but I Could Be Persuaded.”Google Scholar

98. Moore and Smith, “Legislating Medicaid.”

99. Medicaid covers more than fifty distinct populations, although generally income criteria have supplanted categorical links. See Herz, Elicia J. “Medicaid: A Primer” (Washington, D.C., 2010). States continue to have to cover individuals eligible under the guidelines of the former Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program.Google Scholar

100. Moore and Smith, “Legislating Medicaid.”

101. Thompson, Frank J., Health Policy and the Bureaucracy: Politics and Implementation (Cambridge, Mass., 1981).Google Scholar

102. Moore and Smith, “Legislating Medicaid.”

103. Peterson, “Medicaid: The Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP).”

104. Katz Olson, Laura, The Politics of Medicaid (New York, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

105. Mitchell, Allison, “Medicaid Financing and Expenditures” (Washington, D.C., 2012)Google Scholar; Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, “A Historical Review of How States Have Responded to the Availability of Federal Funds for Health Coverage” (Washington, D.C., 2012).Google Scholar

106. Johnson, Judy, “What Are the Common Characteristics of MIAs?” (M.A. thesis, San Jose State University, 1986).Google Scholar

107. Social Security Act Section 1902(a)(13)(A).

108. Peters, Christie P., “Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) Payments: The Basics” (Washington, D.C., 2009), 6.Google Scholar

109. Mechanic, Robert E., “Medicaid’s Disproportionate Share Hospital Program: Complex Structure, Critical Payments” (Washington, D.C., 2004).Google Scholar

110. Coughlin, Teresa A. et al., “State Responses to the Medicaid Spending Crisis: 1988 to 1992,” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 19, no. 4 (1994): 837–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

111. Hearne, Jean, “Medicaid Disproportionate Share Payments” (Washington, D.C., 2005)Google Scholar. Ku, Leighton and Coughlin, Teresa A., “Medicaid Disproportionate Share and Other Special Financing Programs: A Fiscal Dilemma for States and the Federal Government” (Menlo Park, Calif., 1994).Google Scholar

112. Mitchell, Allison, “Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital Payments” (Washington, D.C., 2012)Google Scholar. Coughlin, Teresa A. and Liska, David, “The Medicaid Dispropotionate Share Hospital Payment Program: Background and Issues” (Los Angeles, 1997).Google Scholar

113. Hearne, “Medicaid Disproportionate Share Payments.” Mechanic, “Medicaid’s Disproportionate Share Hospital Program.”

114. Herz, , “Medicaid: A Primer.” Mitchell, “Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital Payments.”Google Scholar

115. Starr, Paul, The Logic of Health Care Reform: Why and How the President’s Plan Will Work (New York, 1994).Google Scholar

116. Skocpol, Theda, Boomerang: Health Care Reform and the Turn against Government (New York, 1997)Google Scholar; Steinmo, Sven and Watts, Jon, “It’s the Institutions, Stupid! Why Comprehensive National Health Insurance Always Fails in America,” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 20, no. 2 (1995): 329–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brady, David W. and Buckley, Kara M., “Health Care Reform in the 103d Congress: A Predictable Failure,” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 20, no. 2 (1995): 447–54.Google Scholar

117. Hacker, Jacob S., The Road to Nowhere: The Genesis of President Clinton’s Plan for Health Security (Princeton, 1997).Google Scholar

118. Ladenheim, Kala, “Health Insurance in Transition: The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996,” Publius 27, no. 2 (1997): 3351CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chaikind, Hinda R. et al., “The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996: Overview and Guidance on Frequently Asked Questions” (Washington, D.C., 2005).Google Scholar

119. Atchinson, Brian K. and Fox, Daniel M., “The Politics of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act,” Health Affairs 16, no. 3 (1997): 146–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

120. Ladenheim, , “Health Insurance in Transition”Google Scholar; Pollitz, Karen et al., “Early Experience with ‘New Federalism’ in Health Insurance Regulation,” Health Affairs 19, no. 4 (2000): 722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

121. Chaikind et al., “The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996.”

122. Haeder, Simon F., “Making the Affordable Care Act Work: High-Risk Pools and Health Insurance Marketplaces,” The Forum 11, no. 3 (2013): 499511.Google Scholar

123. Peterson, “Medicaid: The Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP).”

124. Stone, Julie et al., “Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Provisions in PPACA” (Washington, D.C., 2010).Google Scholar

125. Herz, Elicia J., Peterson, Chris L., and Baumrucker, Evelyne P., “State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP): A Brief Overview” (Washington, D.C., 2009)Google Scholar; Haeder, and Weimer, , “You Can’t Make Me Do It, but I Could Be Persuaded”Google Scholar; U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Children’s Health Insurance: State Experiences in Implementing SCHIP and Considerations for Reauthorization” (Washington, D.C., 2007).Google Scholar

126. Eligible individuals may receive a Trade Readjustment Assistance allowance, an Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance allowance, or a Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation pension payment.

127. This means that individuals can obtain the tax credit at the time of purchase instead of waiting until filing their taxes and being reimbursed retrospectively.

128. Dorn, Stan and Kutyla, Todd, “Health Coverage Tax Credits under the Trade Act of 2002: A Preliminary Analysis of Program Operation” (New York, 2004).Google Scholar

129. The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) offers individuals who have lost insurance coverage provided by their employer the opportunity to continue this coverage under certain conditions for a limited period of time. These conditions include voluntary or involuntary job loss, reduction in the hours worked, transition between jobs, death, divorce, and other life events.

130. Stone-Axelrad, Julie and Lyke, Bob, “Health Coverage Tax Credit Authorized by the Trade Act” (Washington, D.C., 2005).Google Scholar

131. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Health Coverage Tax Credit: Simplified and More Timely Enrollment Process Could Increase Participation” (Washington, D.C., 2004).Google Scholar

132. Meier, Kenneth J., The Political Economy of Regulation: The Case of Insurance (Albany, N.Y., 1988)Google Scholar; Grace, Martin F. and Klein, Robert W., The Future of Insurance Regulation in the United States (Washington, D.C., 2009).Google Scholar

133. For details about the implementation of these programs, see Haeder, “Making the Affordable Care Act Work: High-Risk Pools and Health Insurance Marketplaces”; Haeder, Simon F. and Weimer, David L., “You Can’t Make Me Do It: State Implementation of Insurance Exchanges under the Affordable Care Act,” Public Administration Review 73, no. s1 (2013Google Scholar): S34–S47; Haeder and Weimer, “You Can’t Make Me Do It, but I Could Be Persuaded.”

134. Béland, Daniel, Rocco, Philip, and Waddan, Alex, “Implementing Health Care Reform in the United States: Intergovernmental Politics and the Dilemmas of Institutional Design,” Health Policy 116, no. 1 (2014): 5160CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thompson, Frank J. and Gusmano, Michael K., “The Administrative Presidency and Fractious Federalism: The Case of Obamacare,” Publius: The Journal of Federalism (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Haeder, and Weimer, , “You Can’t Make Me Do It,” and “You Can’t Make Me Do It, but I Could Be Persuaded”Google Scholar; Dinan, John, “Implementing Health Reform: Intergovernmental Bargaining and the Affordable Care Act,” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 44, no. 3 (2014): 399425CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rigby, Elizabeth, “State Resistance to ‘Obamacare,’” The Forum 10, no. 2 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rigby, Elizabeth and Haselswerdt, Jake, “Hybrid Federalism, Partisan Politics, and Early Implementation of State Health Insurance Exchanges,” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 43, no. 3 (2013): 368–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

135. Dinan, “Implementing Health Reform,” 399–425; Haeder and Weimer, “You Can’t Make Me Do It, but I Could Be Persuaded”; Rigby, “State Resistance to ‘Obamacare’”; Rigby and Haselswerdt, “Hybrid Federalism, Partisan Politics, and Early Implementation of State Health Insurance Exchanges.”

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 14
Total number of PDF views: 100 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-76cb886bbf-m9qpn Total loading time: 0.765 Render date: 2021-01-23T16:38:59.146Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Inching Toward Universal Coverage: State-Federal Health-Care Programs in Historical Perspective
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Inching Toward Universal Coverage: State-Federal Health-Care Programs in Historical Perspective
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Inching Toward Universal Coverage: State-Federal Health-Care Programs in Historical Perspective
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *