{"title":"财政联邦制和《平价医疗法案》医疗补助扩张的预算影响","authors":"J. Gruber, B. Sommers","doi":"10.3386/w26862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Medicaid’s federal-state matching system of financing is the nation’s largest example of fiscal federalism. Using generous federal subsidies, the Affordable Care Act incentivized states to expand Medicaid, which became a state option in the aftermath of a 2012 Supreme Court ruling. As of early 2020, 14 states had not yet expanded, with concerns over state budgetary effects described as a key barrier. We use an event-study approach to analyze state budget data from 2010-2018 and assess the effects of state Medicaid expansion decisions. We find that Medicaid expansion increased total spending in expansion states by 6% to 9%, compared to non-expansion states. By source of funds, federal spending via the states increased by 10% in the first year of Medicaid expansion, rising to 27% in 2018. Changes in spending from state funding were modest and non-significant, with less than a 1% change from baseline annually in the most recent years, 2017 and 2018. Meanwhile, we find no evidence that increased Medicaid spending from expansion produced any reductions in spending on education, corrections, transportation, or public assistance. Changes in Medicaid spending tracked closely with the baseline pre-ACA (2013) uninsured rate in each states, with expansion leading to roughly $2680 in added annual spending per uninsured adult. As a result, we estimate states that didn’t expand Medicaid passed up $43 billion in federally-subsidized program funds in 2018. Finally, state projections in the aggregate were reasonably accurate, with expansion states projecting average Medicaid spending from 2014-2018 within 2 percent of the actual amounts, and in fact overestimating Medicaid spending in most years.","PeriodicalId":196905,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Government Expenditures & Welfare Programs (Topic)","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fiscal Federalism and the Budget Impacts of the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid Expansion\",\"authors\":\"J. Gruber, B. Sommers\",\"doi\":\"10.3386/w26862\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Medicaid’s federal-state matching system of financing is the nation’s largest example of fiscal federalism. Using generous federal subsidies, the Affordable Care Act incentivized states to expand Medicaid, which became a state option in the aftermath of a 2012 Supreme Court ruling. As of early 2020, 14 states had not yet expanded, with concerns over state budgetary effects described as a key barrier. We use an event-study approach to analyze state budget data from 2010-2018 and assess the effects of state Medicaid expansion decisions. We find that Medicaid expansion increased total spending in expansion states by 6% to 9%, compared to non-expansion states. By source of funds, federal spending via the states increased by 10% in the first year of Medicaid expansion, rising to 27% in 2018. Changes in spending from state funding were modest and non-significant, with less than a 1% change from baseline annually in the most recent years, 2017 and 2018. Meanwhile, we find no evidence that increased Medicaid spending from expansion produced any reductions in spending on education, corrections, transportation, or public assistance. Changes in Medicaid spending tracked closely with the baseline pre-ACA (2013) uninsured rate in each states, with expansion leading to roughly $2680 in added annual spending per uninsured adult. As a result, we estimate states that didn’t expand Medicaid passed up $43 billion in federally-subsidized program funds in 2018. Finally, state projections in the aggregate were reasonably accurate, with expansion states projecting average Medicaid spending from 2014-2018 within 2 percent of the actual amounts, and in fact overestimating Medicaid spending in most years.\",\"PeriodicalId\":196905,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Government Expenditures & Welfare Programs (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Government Expenditures & Welfare Programs (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3386/w26862\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Government Expenditures & Welfare Programs (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3386/w26862","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11
摘要
医疗补助的联邦-州配对融资体系是美国财政联邦制的最大范例。利用慷慨的联邦补贴,《平价医疗法案》(Affordable Care Act)激励各州扩大医疗补助计划(Medicaid)。在2012年最高法院(Supreme Court)的一项裁决之后,医疗补助成为了各州的选择。截至2020年初,有14个州尚未扩张,对州预算影响的担忧被认为是一个关键障碍。我们使用事件研究方法来分析2010-2018年的州预算数据,并评估州医疗补助扩张决策的影响。我们发现,与没有扩大医疗补助计划的州相比,扩大医疗补助计划的州的总支出增加了6%到9%。从资金来源来看,在医疗补助扩张的第一年,各州的联邦支出增长了10%,2018年上升到27%。国家资金支出的变化不大,也不显著,在最近几年、2017年和2018年,每年从基线变化不到1%。与此同时,我们没有发现任何证据表明,扩大医疗补助计划的支出增加会导致教育、矫正、交通或公共援助方面的支出减少。医疗补助支出的变化与aca实施前(2013年)各州未参保率的基线密切相关,扩张导致每个未参保成年人的年支出增加约2680美元。因此,我们估计,没有扩大医疗补助计划的州在2018年浪费了430亿美元的联邦补贴项目资金。最后,各州的总体预测相当准确,扩张州对2014-2018年平均医疗补助支出的预测在实际金额的2%以内,实际上在大多数年份都高估了医疗补助支出。
Fiscal Federalism and the Budget Impacts of the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid Expansion
Medicaid’s federal-state matching system of financing is the nation’s largest example of fiscal federalism. Using generous federal subsidies, the Affordable Care Act incentivized states to expand Medicaid, which became a state option in the aftermath of a 2012 Supreme Court ruling. As of early 2020, 14 states had not yet expanded, with concerns over state budgetary effects described as a key barrier. We use an event-study approach to analyze state budget data from 2010-2018 and assess the effects of state Medicaid expansion decisions. We find that Medicaid expansion increased total spending in expansion states by 6% to 9%, compared to non-expansion states. By source of funds, federal spending via the states increased by 10% in the first year of Medicaid expansion, rising to 27% in 2018. Changes in spending from state funding were modest and non-significant, with less than a 1% change from baseline annually in the most recent years, 2017 and 2018. Meanwhile, we find no evidence that increased Medicaid spending from expansion produced any reductions in spending on education, corrections, transportation, or public assistance. Changes in Medicaid spending tracked closely with the baseline pre-ACA (2013) uninsured rate in each states, with expansion leading to roughly $2680 in added annual spending per uninsured adult. As a result, we estimate states that didn’t expand Medicaid passed up $43 billion in federally-subsidized program funds in 2018. Finally, state projections in the aggregate were reasonably accurate, with expansion states projecting average Medicaid spending from 2014-2018 within 2 percent of the actual amounts, and in fact overestimating Medicaid spending in most years.