Addressing Crowd Out
Framing the IssueMedicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) have a remarkably successful track record of providing coverage to low and moderate-income children who otherwise would be uninsured. 1 Opponents of expanding these programs often point to crowd out as a reason not to expand these programs or, in some cases, to argue for cutting them back. However, instead of allowing concerns about crowd out to paralyze efforts to cover millions of uninsured children and families, it is far more constructive to find ways to minimize and address the issue without unnecessarily harming children and their families.Even if it is not possible to entirely eliminate crowd out, it is important to note that public program expansions are an extremely efficient way to expand coverage to more uninsured Americans and have been remarkably successful doing so. As Dr. Jonathon Gruber, one of the leading researchers on crowd out, has said, “I want to emphasize a conclusion that has been consistent throughout my research: public insurance expansions are by far the most cost-effective means of expanding coverage in the U.S. today.” 2 Go To Next Section: Legislative AuthorityFootnotes1. M. Rosenbach, et al., “National Evaluation of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program: A Decade of Expanding Coverage and Improving Access,” Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (September 2007). Back 2. Letter from Jonathan Gruber to Rep. John Dingell, Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, (February 28, 2007). Back |
|
Framing the Issue
Resources
|