Health care reform continues to be a controversial issue both for policy makers and constituents. With any large-scale change – people wonder whether the outcomes for their families will be better or worse than under the current system. To help appreciate these issues, the Urban Institute created, The Biggest Losers, Health Edition: Who Would Be Hurt the Most by a Failure to Enact Comprehensive Reforms?. The document addresses the groups, consistent of over 259 million Americans, that would be most affected if comprehensive health care reform is not passed: including 13.1 million self-employed people, 47.8 million people employed in firms of fewer than 100 workers, and 74.3 million people with income levels between 200-400 percent of the poverty level (according to 2008 data). The report is a good resource when considering the way that health care reform will serve families if it is passed, and what the future of health care would look like without reform.
For policies to ensure Children are Healthy and Prepared to Succeed in School.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Contributors
Search This Blog
Labels
- Family Economic Success (147)
- Child Well-being (123)
- Poverty (97)
- Early Care and Education (89)
- Data (71)
- State Budgets (71)
- Child Welfare (62)
- Federal Budget (60)
- Results (55)
- Education (53)
- Stimulus (48)
- Foster Care (47)
- Racial Equity (47)
- Policymakers (43)
- Juvenile Detention (41)
- Job Training (30)
- Ensuring Children are Healthy and Prepared to Succeed in School (29)
- Food Stamps (28)
- Healthy Children (26)
- Home Foreclosures (15)
- Medicaid (15)
- Partnerships (11)
- Low-income (10)
- Affordable Housing (8)
- SNAP (8)
- Affordable Care Act (6)
- Guest Blogger (6)
- Improve Early Grade-Level Reading (6)
- Reintegration of Ex-Offenders (6)
- Courts (5)
- Home Visiting (5)
- Sequester (5)
- mental health (4)
- Census (3)
- EITC (3)
- Health Equity (3)
- Higher Education (3)
- Income inequality (3)
- TANF (3)
- Transitioning Youth (3)
- Video (3)
- health insurance (3)
- juvenile justice (3)
- Collaboration (2)
- Disparities in Health Care (2)
- Minimum wage (2)
- Teen Pregnancy (2)
- immigration (2)
- place-based initiatives (2)
- who pays (2)
- Arizona v. United States (1)
- Black male education (1)
- Black men going to college (1)
- Buffett Rule (1)
- Child Tax Credit (1)
- Criminal Justice (1)
- DMC (1)
- Introduction to Website (1)
- Mexican migration (1)
- Minority Health Month (1)
- NIH Minority Health Promotion Day (1)
- Navigator Program (1)
- Promise Neighborhoods (1)
- SOTU (1)
- Strengthening Families (1)
- Substance Abuse (1)
- Success Stories (1)
- asset tests (1)
- benefits of immigrant integration (1)
- http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif (1)
- immigrant demographic (1)
- just tax (1)
- progressive tax (1)
- regressive tax (1)
- social security (1)
- solitary confinement (1)
- tax policy (1)
- tax returns (1)
- unemployment insurance (1)
- welcome (1)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(135)
-
▼
March
(19)
- Enhancing Home Visitation Policy and Practice with...
- Defining Poverty: Developing a Supplemental Povert...
- New State Child Welfare Policy Database
- Washington State Partners to Improve Child Welfare
- Job Opening for Senior-level Communications Director
- Women and the Changing Workforce
- Elementary and Secondary Education Act Reauthoriza...
- Mapping the Reccession: A Graphic Transformation o...
- A New Issue Brief: The NIS 4 and Child Welfare in ...
- Supporting Parents with Children in the Child Welf...
- A Look at Federally Funded Education Programs
- Comprehensive Health Reform
- A Safety Net that Works through Tough Economic Times
- The Next Challenge for Public Housing
- The 2010 Census: Methodology, Implications & Myths
- Asset Ownership and Debt in Families with Children
- Supporting the Needs of Children: The Interaction ...
- Realizing the Racial Impacts of Legislation and Bu...
- "The Three Faces of Work-Family Conflict"
-
▼
March
(19)
No comments:
Post a Comment