IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The Welfare Impact of Reducing Choice in Medicare Part D: A Comparison of Two Regulation Strategies

  • Claudio Lucarelli

    (Cornell University)

  • Jeffrey T. Prince

    (Department of Business Economics and Public Policy, Indiana University Kelley School of Business)

  • Kosali Simon

    (School of Public and Economic Affairs, Indiana University, and NBER)

Medicare’s prescription drug benefit (Part D) has been its largest expansion of benefits since 1965. Since the implementation of Part D, many regulatory proposals have been advanced in order to improve this government-created market. Among the most debated are proposals to limit the number of options, in response to concerns that there are “too many” plans. In this paper we study the welfare impact of two feasible approaches (of similar magnitude) toward limiting the number of Part D plans: reducing the maximum number of plans each firm can offer per region and removing plans that provide doughnut hole coverage. To this end, we propose and estimate a model of market equilibrium, which we later use to evaluate the impact of regulating down the number of Part D plans. Our counterfactuals provide an important assessment of the losses to consumers (and producers) resulting from government limitations on choice. These losses must be weighed against the widely discussed expected gains due to reduced search costs from limiting options. We find that the annual search costs should be at least two thirds of the average monthly premium in order to justify a regulation that allows only two plans per firm. However, this number would be substantially lower if the limitation in the number of plans is coupled with a decrease in product differentiation (e.g., by removing plans that cover the doughnut hole). For validation purposes, we also assess the impact of a recent major merger, and find that our model performs very well out of sample.

If 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.

File URL: http://kelley.iu.edu/riharbau/RePEc/iuk/wpaper/bepp2010-14-lucarelli-prince-simon.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy in its series Working Papers with number 2010-14.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Oct 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:iuk:wpaper:2010-14
Contact details of provider: Postal: 1309 East Tenth Street, Room 451, Bloomington, IN 47405-1701
Phone: 812-855-9219
Fax: 812-855-3354
Web page: http://kelley.iu.edu/bepp/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Aviv Nevo, 1998. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," NBER Working Papers 6387, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Darius Lakdawalla & Neeraj Sood, 2007. "The Welfare Effects of Public Drug Insurance," NBER Working Papers 13501, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Helen Levy & David Weir, 2007. "Take-Up of Medicare Part D and the SSA Subsidy: Early Results from the Health and Retirement Study," Working Papers wp163, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
  4. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-90, July.
  5. Heiss, Florian & McFadden, Daniel L. & Winter, Joachim, 2006. "Who failed to enroll in Medicare Part D, and why? Early results," Munich Reprints in Economics 19427, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
  6. Aviv Nevo, 2000. "Mergers with Differentiated Products: The Case of the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(3), pages 395-421, Autumn.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iuk:wpaper:2010-14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Rick Harbaugh)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.