AEAweb: Journal Article Full-Text Access
Note to Institutional Subscribers: If you normally access AEAweb journal content via your university or firm's subscription and receive this page, please click
here. The most likely causes of this are a recently changed IP address, a new subscription, or the renewal of a lapsed institutional subscription. This page will stop appearing on the next synchronisation of the document delivery and authentication systems.
You may also click here for pay-per-view, Athens login and other access options .
AEA Members, please click the button below to access the login form:
Swartz, Katherine. 2003. "Reinsuring Risk to Increase Access to Health Insurance ."
,
93(2): 283-287.
Show Article Details
DOI: 10.1257/000282803321947209
Abstract:At 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.
Authors:
Swartz, Katherine
JEL Classifications:
:
None
If you are an AEA member and do not have an AEAweb login, please
click here.
If you would like to become an AEA member, please see our
membership page.
If you arrived at this page via a journal article link, you will be redirected to the pdf after successful login.
If your first login attempt fails, and you have recently signed up for access or have recently changed your password, you may need to wait a few moments and try again.
Please contact us at
notify@aeaweb.org with any problems or questions.
Contents of Current Issues
May 2013 AER
Spring 2013 JEP
May 2013 AEJ: Policy
May 2013 AEJ: Micro
April 2013 AEJ: Macro
April 2013 AEJ: Applied
March 2013 JEL
Virtual Field Journals
In the News:
The Huffington Post reports on a study addressing the influence of lifestyle factors on shrinking height in the elderly published in the April issue of AEJ: Applied Economics.
Michael Frakes' (Cornell Law School) article on medical liability standards from the February issue of the American Economic Review was discussed as part of a Bloomberg opinion piece on medical malpractice.
Slate Magazine recently discussed former AEA president, George Akerlof's classic behavioral research and a 2012 American Economic Review study conducted by German and Swiss researchers to explore how gifting can motivate some employees more than cash incentives do in the workplace.
Contact Us