Reinsuring Risk to Increase Access to Health Insurance
AbstractAt least 41 million Americans are currently without health insurance in any given month (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2002). They are uninsured for a variety of reasons, and most people who lack coverage are affected by more than one reason. Two generalizations can be made, however. First, a majority simply cannot afford to purchase health insurance unless it is heavily subsidized. Most do not have access to employer-sponsored coverage and so must purchase any insurance in the non-group (individual) health-insurance market - a market where, as I explain below, insurance is typically twice as expensive as employer-group coverage if it is not denied outright. Since about two-thirds of the uninsured have incomes below $35,000, non-group health-insurance premiums often exceed 10 percent of their incomes. The second generalization is that, to an important extent, high premiums in the non-group market and denial of coverage reflect market failure due to asymmetric information. Insurers can never know as much as an individual does about his or her health, family history of health problems, and tendency to seek medical care. Because of this asymmetry, it is impossible for an insurer to set premiums that accurately reflect the non-random portion of health-care costs for different individuals. The non-group market is the only health-insurance option for people without employersponsored coverage. Tax-related subsidies as proposed by members of Congress and the Bush administration do not address the market-failure problems and so are unlikely to make insurance much more affordable. To increase access to health insurance, risk in the non-group market needs to be shifted to a broader population base. In what follows, I first describe the three distinct health-insurance markets in which people can obtain health insurance, and the special nature of competition among insurance companies in the non-group market. Then I make the case for government to act as reinsurer and assume the risk of extremely high-cost people. Efficiency in the non-group health-insurance market would be improved if the government reinsured the market. Equity also would be increased if the government acted as reinsurer because more uninsured people would have access to insurance. Finally, I describe precedents for this role for government in other markets, and why tax-related subsidies will not succeed in increasing health-insurance coverage unless the risks of extremely high costs are shifted to the government.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by American Economic Association in its journal American Economic Review.
Volume (Year): 93 (2003)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Rodriguez, Hector P. & Laugesen, Miriam J. & Watts, Carolyn A., 2010. "A randomized experiment of issue framing and voter support of tax increases for health insurance expansion," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(2-3), pages 245-255, December.
- Ronald Eduardo Gómez Suárez, 2007. "Cream-Skimming And Risk Adjustment in Colombian Health Insurance System:: The Public Insurer Case," ARCHIVOS DE ECONOMÃA 004295, DEPARTAMENTO NACIONAL DE PLANEACIÓN.
- Cogan, John F. & Hubbard, R. Glenn & Kessler, Daniel P., 2010. "The effect of Medicare coverage for the disabled on the market for private insurance," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 418-425, May.
- John F. Cogan & R. Glenn Hubbard & Daniel P. Kessler, 2008. "The Effect of Medicare Coverage for the Disabled on the Market for Private Insurance," NBER Working Papers 14309, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Richard Cebula & Anthony Bopp, 2008. "Estimating the Percentage of the US Population without Health Insurance: An Ecological Approach," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 336-347, August.
- Richard Cebula & Michael Toma, 2006. "Determinants of Geographic Differentials in the Voter Participation Rate," Atlantic Economic Journal, International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 34(1), pages 33-40, March.
- Hsu, Minchung, 2008. "Health Insurance, the Social Welfare System and Household Saving," MPRA Paper 21281, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2010.
- Richard Cebula & Holly Meads, 2008. "The Electoral College System, Political Party Dominance, and Voter Turnout, With Evidence from the 2004 Presidential Election," Atlantic Economic Journal, International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 36(1), pages 53-64, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jane Voros) or (Michael P. Albert).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.