Crowding Out Private Coverage: The Cost of Expanding Children's Health Insurance

New research on the expansion of the government's main children's health insurance program offers a reminder that much of the last decade's worth of coverage expansions have come at the expense of private insurance.

In a paper for the April issue of the journal Health Services Research, Researchers from RAND Corporation, Columbia University, and the University of California report that eligibility expansions of the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), a state-managed Medicaid sister program, between 2002 and 2009 didn't actually increase coverage by very much. During that time frame, 18 states increased eligibility, and in 13 of those states, the increase was relatively large, altering the program's requirements so that it covered children from families with incomes between 200 and 400 percent of the poverty line. But those eligibility changes didn't result in large coverage increases. Overall, the study reports, for every 100 children who became eligible, just four actually took advantage of the new coverage. And only about half of those children were previously uninsured. The authors estimate that the upper bound "crowd out" rate was 46 percent. 

Nearly half the time, in other words, expanding CHIP's eligibility requirements has resulted in moving kids out of private insurance programs that are generally associated with better health outcomes and into a worse performing public health program. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Tim||

    WTF?
    Massive thread dump this afternoon.

  • R C Dean||

    expanding CHIP's eligibility requirements has resulted in moving kids out of private insurance programs

    Yes, indeedy. The underlying dynamic is this:

    You can expand eligibility all you want, but folks who have never
    financial arrangements, etc., aren't going to suddenly start, and go from having no coverage to signing up for the program.

    Whereas, the folks who already have some kind of insurance do plan, make arrangements, etc. will sign up for the program because its a better deal for them (free v. whatever premiums they are paying.

    Expanding coverage will always strip away private coverage, without really reducing the number of those without coverage.

  • R C Dean||

    And, yes, this illustrates Tulpa's favorite Iron Law, the one about foreseeable consequences.

  • ||

    Nearly half the time, in other words, expanding CHIP's eligibility requirements has resulted in moving kids out of private insurance programs that are generally associated with better health outcomes and into a worse performing public health program.

    The system works!

  • John Thacker||

    I have some otherwise intelligent liberal friends who were shocked and appalled that employers would drop coverage and otherwise encourage employees to sign up for newly subsidized coverage.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement