A new study comparing two different approaches to expanding health insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) finds that both yield “substantial benefits for low-income adults” compared with no expansion.
With Commonwealth Fund support, Harvard’s Benjamin D. Sommers, M.D., and colleagues compared the experiences of low-income adults in Kentucky, which expanded Medicaid eligibility, and Arkansas, which used federal funding to purchase private coverage in the ACA marketplace, with the experiences of low-income adults in Texas, which chose not to expand Medicaid. Their research, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, shows that broadening eligibility for subsidized insurance, whether through Medicaid or the so-called private option, is associated with greater receipt of outpatient, preventive, and chronic disease care, as well as reduced emergency department use and improved self-reported health.