Examining the health care market in a historical framework, Drake analyzes the forces and events that have shaped American health care in the twentieth century and sheds new light on why and how our health care system has dampened competitive market forces and failed to provide sound value for much of our health care expenditures. He examines the roles that physicians, hospitals, insurance companies, businesses, individual consumers, and government legislation have played in creating a provider-dominated market in which the cost of care has been concealed from consumers. Comparing U.S. health care expenditures with those of other developed countries, he concludes that a significant part of our health care problem is the style of medicine practiced in the United States, which is much more specialized and high tech than in other developed nations.

Drake develops proposals for health care financing reform that consider the political and economic difficulties involved. He first examines the Clinton health care reform plan and makes specific recommendations for revisions that would improve its likelihood of controlling costs. He then offers an alternative proposal that would both maintain the principle of universal, noncancelable coverage and eliminate the flaws in the market for health care services by giving consumers a financial stake in cost containment.

This timely argument, combining economic and historical analysis with thoughtful consideration of the motivating humanitarian and political concerns, will be of interest to everyone seeking to understand and to reform our ailing health care system.

States are increasingly important players in the current efforts to reform U.S. health care, as the federal government withdraws from this responsibility. Robert B. Hackey analyzes the varied routes states have taken in reformulating health care policy and provides a road map of what specific strategies work and why.

In this comparative case study, Hackey focuses on four states—Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Rhode Island—that have had markedly different experiences with regulating health care over the past two decades. Hackey's detailed comparisons show how the states' policies changed over time, moving from regulatory to market-oriented solutions, and examines which policy programs appear best poised to meet the future.

Hackey uses regime theory to explain how the states' policy choices concerning cost control and entry regulation were shaped by the prevailing political culture and institution of each state. He concludes that the autonomy of state government form special interests is vital to the successful adoption, implementation and outcome of state initiatives.

Rethinking Health Care Policy offers policymakers, planners and specialists useful insights into the politics of state regulation and into future directions for health care reform.

In 1988, a new health care system, the Sistema Único de Saúde (Unified Health Care System or SUS) was formally established in Brazil. The system was intended, among other goals, to provide universal access to health care services and to redefine health as a citizen’s right and a duty of the state. A Right to Health explores how these goals have unfolded within an urban peripheral community located on the edges of the northeastern city of Fortaleza. Focusing on the decade 1998–2008 and the impact of health care reforms on one low-income neighborhood, Jessica Jerome documents the tensions that arose between the ideals of the reforms and their entanglement with pervasive socioeconomic inequality, neoliberal economic policy, and generational tension with the community.

Using ethnographic and historical research, the book traces the history of political activism in the community, showing that, since the community’s formation in the early 1930s, residents have consistently fought for health care services. In so doing, Jerome develops a multilayered portrait of urban peripheral life and suggests that the notion of health care as a right of each citizen plays a major role not only in the way in which health care is allocated, but, perhaps more importantly, in how health care is understood and experienced.