State Politics And The Uneven Fate Of Medicaid Expansion.

Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), state governments play a central role in deciding whether millions of low-income Americans have access to Medicaid. During the early years of ACA implementation, conservative opposition stalled the expansion of eligibility for Medicaid in many Republican-controlled states, even in the face of strong fiscal incentives. Can any forces overcome this partisan divide? In this article we consider the role of several key mechanisms that have affected Medicaid expansion over the past decade, including electoral competition, ballot-box initiatives, interest-group coalitions, and entrepreneurial administrators. While each mechanism has helped place Medicaid expansion on the agenda, they have done so unevenly. In Republican-controlled states where electoral competition is weak and ballot initiatives are unavailable, Medicaid expansion remains unlikely. Even when expansion is successful at the ballot box, however, state legislatures and governors have been able to delay or reverse voter-led initiatives. Moreover, the highly salient and partisan nature of Medicaid expansion has made it difficult for interest-group coalitions and progressive administrators to play a leading role in policy change. The future of Medicaid expansion, as well as other significant portions of the ACA, will continue to depend on the character of representative democracy in the states.

Female sex workers use power over their day-to-day lives to meet the condition of a conditional cash transfer intervention to incentivize safe sex.

Female Sex Workers are a core population in the HIV epidemic, and interventions such as conditional cash transfers (CCTs), effective in other health domains, are a promising new approach to reduce the spread of HIV. Here we investigate how a population of Tanzanian female sex workers, though constrained in many ways, experience and use their power in the context of a CCT intervention that incentivizes safe sex. We analyzed 20 qualitative in-depth interviews with female sex workers enrolled in a randomized-controlled CCT program, the RESPECT II pilot, and found that while such women have limited choices, they do have substantial power over their work logistics that they leveraged to meet the conditions of the CCT and receive the cash award. It was through these decisions over work logistics, such as reducing the number of workdays and clients, that the CCT intervention had its greatest impact on modifying female sex workers' behavior.

Going for the cure: patient interest groups and health advocacy in the United States.

Citizen groups, though celebrated during their sudden arrival on the lobbying scene, are vastly outnumbered by groups representing elite, occupationally based interests. Sensitive to the odds that nonoccupational groups face, this study asks what factors have allowed patient groups to form and become active in federal politics. Using three distinct data sets--a survey of patient groups, content analysis of group websites, and in-depth interviews with group representatives and policy makers in Washington, DC--this study assesses the activities of patient groups in the United States and argues that patient advocacy organizations garner stability from the relatively easy provision of selective and solidary benefits. Larger patient groups are especially likely to make use of these structural advantages to pursue congressional lobbying strategies. However, even these groups seek out noncompetitive, distributive political environments. Moreover, the study finds that patient groups rarely form coalitions across diseases, forgoing the potential to collectively speak for shared patient interests.