Our Health Policy Matters

Arkansas supplants Oklahoma in the 2013 OHPM rankings as the worst state for your health.  Arkansas was joined in the bottom ten by five other southern states and four states from the west.  And here's all you need to know about why states in the bottom ten are bad for your health.   Life expectancy in those states is the same as it is in Paraguay - 76.6 years .  This is four years fewer, or an entire Presidential term less, than life expectancy in Massachusetts and Connecticut - the two states at the top of this year's ranking. Two states – Texas (39, up two places from last year) and West Virginia (38, up five places from last year) – escaped the bottom ten this year.  Kentucky found its way back after one year in 35 th place, and South Carolina entered the bottom ten after dropping eight places from 40 th last year.  Here are the bottom ten, with the change from last year in parentheses: 41. Kentucky (-6).   Kentucky entered the bottom ten this year n

After a year in second place, Massachusetts is once again the best state for your health in the 2013 Our Health Policy Matters rankings . In first place in 2011, Massachusetts dropped to second last year behind Connecticut.  It edged out Connecticut this year based on the rankings of all fifty states in a combination of seven national source rankings and/or spending categories. Here are the top ten states, with the change from last year’s ranking in parentheses. 1. Massachusetts (+1).   Among the seven components of the rankings, Massachusetts was only 4 th in the Healthy State rankings, and 11 th in the Kids Count health rankings.   But it earns its top rank overall because of consistently high placements in five other health care rankings. 2. Connecticut (-1).   Last year’s winner, Connecticut ranks 2 nd overall in the Kids Count health rankings and in the percentage of residents with employer-based private insurance.   But it is only in the middle of the pack (

The House of Representatives voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act for the 40 th time last week.  It did this before balancing the budget, passing a jobs bill, reforming election laws, or anything else that might actually improve its standing in the eyes of the general public. So what began for some members of Congress as principled opposition to federal “overreach” has turned into a political punch line: “How many more votes will it take for the House of Representatives to repeal Obamacare?  It doesn’t matter, because the House doesn’t count anyway.” The very first column I wrote after the mid-term election in 2010 was entitled “ Six Reasons Why Health Reform Won’t be Repealed .”  In it, I argued that there were at least five substantive reasons why the Affordable Care Act would not be repealed in spite of the Republican House takeover.  These included the popularity of the expanded Medicare benefits, the benefits to early retirees, the benefits to adult children, an

Connecticut spends four times more per capita on state mental health services than Texas.  In Florida, 25 percent fewer people report having mental illnesses than in Washington. Across the nation, there are significant differences in the amounts states spend on mental health services.  Connecticut spends $189 per capita, while Texas spends only $39. But there are also significant differences in the reported prevalence of mental illnesses.  For example, fewer than 18 percent of Floridians report having a mental illness during the past year, but in Washington almost 24 percent do. But what happens when you put spending and prevalence together?  Some new rankings emerge that give you a measure of each state’s real commitment to protecting mental health – and treating mental illness – in their population.  This week, I have ranked all fifty states using both spending and prevalence data.       I have taken per capita mental health spending from Kaiser Family Foundati