Texas vs. California: The Uninsured

Based on the Census Bureau’s newly released report on national income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in 2012, the rates of those without health insurance declined nationally and in many states, including Texas and California. Considering there is much noise in annual uninsured data, let us consider 2-year average datafrom 2009-2010 to 2011-2012. These data show that across the nation the number of uninsured fell by 1.2 million to 48.2 million, decreasing the uninsured rate by 0.6 percent to 15.6 percent. Between these two periods, California and Texas, the nation's largest economies and populations, also noticed declines in their uninsured rates but for different reasons. While Texas' total uninsured remained essentially unchanged at 6.3 million, the uninsured rate fell by 0.9 percent to 24.2 percent. California's uninsured decreased by 66,000 to 7.1 million, in which its uninsured rate fell by 0.6 percent to 18.8 percent. Although the greater decline in California's total uninsured compared with Texas indicates that the Golden State's health care coverage condition improved more than the Lone Star State’s (and this tends to make the headlines), this discounts the fact that the uninsured rate declined faster in Texas (see chart below) and overall does not tell the whole story. There are several issues we must consider: 1. Population growth, 2. Uninsured characteristics, and 3. Access to care.   Over these two-year periods, Texas’ population increased by 3.5 percent, or 911,000, and California’s increased by only 2 percent, or 767,000. With California’s total population totaling 1.5 times larger than in Texas, this 144,000 greater population increase in Texas reveals more about how much more substantial the decline in the poverty rate of 0.9percent is compared with 0.6percent. The flood of people looking for more opportunity in Texas also comes at a price of potentially more uninsured. We must also consider the make-up of the uninsured. A recent report notes that only a small percentage of Texans who want health insurance cannot afford it. Other uninsured Texans can afford to purchase it but choose not to, are eligible for Medicaid or CHIP but have not enrolled, or are undocumented workers. Finally, the larger increase in health insurance coverage does not necessarily equate to increase in health care services. This is clear from California’s Medi-Cal program that has the lowest Medicaid reimbursement rates to doctors in the nation, forcing many doctors to refuse those patients. Despite other states having a lower uninsured rate than Texas, this does not mean that they are able to get more health care services.     Some would like to believe that these data reveal how terrible the Texas Model is because so many Texans do not have health coverage. However, even without overlooking the issues above, Texas' health care sector has room for improvement. Through more choice given to individuals and pro-market reforms, Texas' health care services can be the best in the nation.  Chart Below: Texas Uninsured Rate Declines Faster Than California's

Press Release September 20, 2013

TPPF releases a Policy Perspective on the Electricity Market

AUSTIN – The Texas Public Policy Foundation today released Competition is Working in the Texas Electricity Market, an Energy Perspective examining how Texans have fared since competition was introduced into most of the Texas electricity market over 15 years ago. “Texans are paying less for electricity today in real dollars than they did in 2001, while at the same time U.S. consumers are paying more,” said Bill Peacock, the Foundation’s Vice President of Research and Director of the Center for Economic Freedom. “Most Texans also have far more choice in the marketplace. Competition is the one factor that sets Texas apart from the rest of the country that would make this possible.”                                                                                                 Peacock adds, “Out of concerns over reliability and profitability, regulators and generators want to reduce competition and adopt a capacity market in Texas. There is no evidence, however, that existing capacity markets operated throughout the U.S. are any more reliable than Texas’ energy-only market—as witnessed by last week’s rolling blackouts and curtailments in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan and Pennsylvania. But there is plenty of evidence that capacity markets make electricity more expensive and will result in billions of dollars a year in subsidies for generators paid for by Texas consumers.” This paper is the second in a series of weekly papers the Center for Economic Freedom will produce examining the debate over the reliability of Texas’ electricity market.   Bill Peacock is the vice president of research and director of the Center for Economic Freedom with the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.   The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.    Primary website: www.TexasPolicy.com Facebook page: www.Facebook.com/TexasPublicPolicyFoundation Twitter feed: www.Twitter.com/TPPF  

Press Release September 18, 2013

Right on Crime chosen as finalist for Atlas Templeton Freedom Award

The Atlas Network announced today that Right on Crime, a project of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, has been chosen as a finalist for their 2013 Templeton Freedom Award. The prestigious award is given to think tanks around the world that have made an impact in public policy, contributed to the field of free-enterprise education and policy research, and laid the groundwork for further progress in securing economic freedom.

Press Release September 17, 2013

TPPF experts publish article in the Texas Tech Administrative Law Journal

AUSTIN – Texas Public Policy Foundation experts Kathleen Hartnett White and Josiah Neeley co-authored an article in the latest issue of the Texas Tech Administrative Law Journal. The article, Who Regulates the Regulator? Cost-Effectiveness Analysis In Texas State Agency Rulemaking, 14 Tex. Tech Admin. L. J. 401 (2013), examines how appropriately structured regulatory impact analysis can increase...

Press Release September 11, 2013

Will Australia’s Elections Doom the Carbon Tax?

Conservatives won a landslide victory this weekend in Australia. A coalition of the Liberal and National parties (which in Australian terms are the right of center political parties) led by Tony Abbott won 88 seats in Australia’s 150 seat parliament, against 57 seats by left-wing Labor Party. One key factor behind this electoral victory was the unpopularity of Australia’s new carbon tax scheme, which had been instituted under the previous Labor government. Incoming Prime Minister Tony Abbott has pledged to repeal the carbon tax, and even Labor leader Kevin Rudd campaigned on a promise to convert it into a cap-and-trade system. The election is important to America because of what is says about the political viability of carbon taxes. In fact, as Robert Murphy of the Institute for Energy Research has noted, Australia’s carbon tax experience casts doubt on many of the claims made in favor of a carbon tax. Both electricity prices and unemployment spiked in Australia after its carbon tax was introduced, without any comparable environmental benefit: [T]he promises of those calling for a “pro-growth” U.S. carbon tax have been proven to be utterly false in Australia: Its carbon tax came with income tax increases and fewer jobs as well as morecommand-and-control energy regulations. The debate over a carbon tax is now not just one of theoretical speculation; proponents need to explain why the U.S. outcome would be different from what actually happened in Australia.

Press Release September 9, 2013

Federal Over-Reach in Louisiana

Last week, the U.S. Justice Department filed suit against the state of Louisiana over its education scholarship program, claiming that as much “impeded the desegregation process” in Louisiana public schools under federal orders to desegregate. From the New Orleans Times-Picayune: Thirty-four school systems could be affected, including those of Jefferson, Plaquemines, St. John the Baptist and St. Tammany parishes. Under the lawsuit, the state would be barred from assigning students in those systems  to private schools unless a federal judge agreed to it. A court hearing is tentatively set for Sept. 19. These are treacherous waters. Mandatory racial segregation, especially within our education system, was a shameful practice and represents a dark period in our country’s proud history. Parents of all races and classes should have the right to send their child to any school they want. That’s what desegregation in our education system should ultimately be about. Unfortunately, this lawsuit, even though its heart (for lack of better phrasing) may be in the right place, seems to run counter to the notion of freedom of choice in in our school systems: The Justice Department's primary argument is that letting students leave for vouchered private schools can disrupt the racial balance in public school systems that desegregation orders are meant to protect. Those orders almost always set rules for student transfers with the school system. The danger here lies in putting an ideal vision of the public school system over the good of students themselves. That is the potential harm in this lawsuit, regardless of one’s opinion on education scholarships or what the federal government’s role in education should be. Is limiting the freedom of parents and students to attend a school that best suits their needs going to enhance equality, or quality for that matter, in our education system? A final note: this lawsuit also demonstrates one of the drawbacks of statewide education scholarship programs, which is to say legal vulnerability. Over the last few years, several of the country’s larger choice programs—Indiana’s, New Hampshire’s, and Louisiana even before the federal suit—have faced litigation, though more commonly from within their own state rather than from the DOJ. Indiana successfully defended their program. New Hampshire and Louisiana have thus far been less successful in doing so. States considering the implementation of such programs in the future (hopefully including Texas) should be very careful when designing such a program to reduce the risk of legal challenge. The opponents of school choice are numerous and motivated, a fact that education reformers should always keep in mind. 

Press Release August 27, 2013
Load More