Differences in Health Insurance Coverage between Part-Time and Full-Time Private-Sector Workers, 2005 and 2015

Source: William A. Carroll and G. Edward Miller, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Statistical Brief #511, April 2018

Highlights:
– In 2015, among non-elderly private-sector workers, those working full time were more than 4 times as likely as part-time workers to be policyholders of employer-sponsored insurance provided through their current main job (66.9 vs. 15.1 percent).
– In 2015, part-time workers were more than 2 times as likely as full-time workers to have other ESI coverage (38.9 vs. 14.5 percent) which accounted for nearly three-quarters (72.0 percent) of all ESI coverage held by part-time workers.
– From 2005 to 2015, the percentage of part-time workers covered by ESI from any source decreased by 10.1 percentage points, from 64.1 to 54.0 percent.
– From 2005 to 2015, the increase in public coverage was larger for part-time workers than for full-time workers (11.3 vs. 2.2 percentage points).
– Both groups of workers had a significant decline in the percentage uninsured from 2005 to 2015, with the uninsurance rate for full-time workers dropping 3.0 percentage points (from 12.6 to 9.6 percent) and the rate for part-time workers dropping 6.6 percentage points (from 19.3 to 12.7 percent).

RAND Hospital Data Web-Based Tool

Source: RAND, 2018

From the summary:
Medicare-certified hospitals and other institutional providers are required to submit an annual cost report to a Medicare Administrative Contractor. Cost reports contain provider information such as facility characteristics, utilization data, cost and charges by cost center (in total and for Medicare), Medicare settlement data, and financial statement data. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) maintains the cost report data in the Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS). The RAND Hospital Data tool is an effort to enhance CMS HCRIS data to make them more accessible and useful to a broad audience of academics, analysts, and hospital executives and their consultants. The tool provides users with data sets that are conveniently packaged and documented and that include value-added fields derived from HCRIS data, such as measures of occupancy and profitability. The goal of the tool is to make analytic tasks easier for those who work regularly with the data and to broaden the set of users.

What It Costs to Run Prisons in Your State

Source: Michael B. Sauter, 24/7 Wall st., July 26, 2018

Nearly 1.5 million Americans were incarcerated in state prisons in 2016. That same year, U.S. states spent about $58 billion to keep these people locked up.

How much each state spends on prisons goes far beyond a simple per prisoner calculation. In fact, there is little to no correlation between the states that spend the most per capita and the states with more prisoners per capita. Instead, variations in state spending boil down to a range of budgetary factors and policy decisions.

Prisons have many expenses related to their main function of confining lawbreakers. In addition to securing the prisoners with infrastructure, technology, and personnel, they have to provide inmates with basic necessities such as food, health care, and even entertainment. On a per capita basis, state prison spending ranges from less than $100 per person to nearly $500 per person. 24/7 Wall st. reviewed the states with the highest and lowest prison spending per person. ….

…. To identify how much each state spends on corrections, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed state prison spending from the National Association of State Budget Officers, as collected by The Sentencing Project, a nonprofit focusing on criminal justice reform. Average annual correctional officer salaries are from the Department of Labor. Incarceration rates and the share of prisoners in private prisons are from The Sentencing Project, and crime rates per 100,000 are from the FBI Unified Crime report. All figures listed are for 2016, with the exception of the private prisoner figure, which is for 2015. ….

Even Libertarians Admit Medicare for All Would Save Billions

Source: Matt Bruenig, Jacobin, July 30, 2018

A new study from a libertarian think tank admits that Medicare for All would save a whopping $300 billion. …. The report’s methods are pretty straightforward. Blahous starts with current projections about how much the country will spend on health care between 2022 and 2031. From there, he adds the costs associated with higher utilization of medical services and then subtracts the savings from lower administrative costs, lower reimbursements for medical services, and lower drug prices. After this bit of arithmetic, Blahous finds that health expenditures would be lower for every year during the first decade of implementation. The net change across the whole ten-year period is a savings of $303 billion. ….

Related:
The Costs of a National Single-Payer Healthcare System
Source: Charles Blahous, George Mason University, Mercatus Working Paper, 2018

The leading current bill to establish single-payer health insurance, the Medicare for All Act (M4A), would, under conservative estimates, increase federal budget commitments by approximately $32.6 trillion during its first 10 years of full implementation (2022–2031), assuming enactment in 2018. This projected increase in federal healthcare commitments would equal approximately 10.7 percent of GDP in 2022, rising to early 12.7 percent of GDP in 2031 and further thereafter. Doubling all currently projected federal individual and corporate income tax collections would be insufficient to finance the added federal costs of the plan. It is likely that the actual cost of M4A would be substantially greater than these estimates, which assume significant administrative and drug cost savings under the plan, and also assume that healthcare providers operating under M4A will be reimbursed at rates more than 40 percent lower than those currently paid by private health insurance.

Credit Conditions: U.S. State And Local Government Credit Conditions Improve As Economic Growth Picks Up

Source: S&P Global Finance, July 26, 2018
(subscription required)

Midway through 2018, accelerating economic growth is providing a favorable near-term backdrop for credit conditions in the state and local government sectors. According to S&P Global Ratings’ updated baseline forecast, U.S. GDP is on a trajectory to expand by 3.0% in real terms in 2018….

Explaining the Wage Growth Mystery

Source: Adam Ozimek, Regional Financial Review, June 2018
(subscription required)

A wage “mystery” has puzzled economics commentators for several years: If unemployment is so low, why has wage growth not picked up? There is no puzzle when the right measures are used. The problem with how wages are measured is that the most commonly used measure is biased over the business cycle. The problem with how labor slack is measured is that the magnitude and depth of the Great Recession led many workers who could and would work again to exit the labor force entirely. Many workers were no longer being counted as unemployed, making the unemployment rate a poor gauge of labor market slack.

Curbing Stock Buybacks: A Crucial Step to Raising Worker Pay and Reducing Inequality — An Analysis of Three Industries — Restaurant, Retail, and Food Manufacturing

Source: Irene Tung and Katy Milani, National Employment Law Project (NELP) and the Roosevelt Institute, July 2018

From the summary:
In a joint publication of the National Employment Law Project (NELP) and the Roosevelt Institute, Irene Tung and Katy Milani expose the extent of stock buyback spending across the U.S. economy from 2015 to 2017—finding that companies spent almost 60 percent of net profits on buybacks. At a time of growing economic inequality, with millions of workers in low-wage industries struggling to make ends meet, that is money that corporations could instead use to improve worker pay.

This report is a crucial addition to any effort to address today’s high-profit, low-wage economy, in which corporate executives and shareholders extract value from corporations rather than creating a cycle of continuous productivity growth, through which workers, consumers, and the economy at large benefit.

One of the primary strategies used to extract profits up and out of companies is the stock buyback—a practice in which corporations repurchase their own stocks from the open market to artificially drive up share prices. Stock buybacks greatly benefit corporate executives, but they leave companies with fewer resources available to invest in workers, business expansion, and long-term economic growth.

By highlighting three core industries—restaurant, retail, and food manufacturing, in which millions of our nation’s workers struggle to make ends meet in low-wage, economically insecure jobs—Tung and Milani demonstrate how workers, and thus the economy at large, could benefit if CEOs chose to redirect money spent on stock buybacks toward worker compensation.

Key findings from the report include:
– The restaurant industry spent more on stock buybacks than it made in profits, funding buybacks through debt and cash reserves. Buybacks totaled 136.5 percent of net profits.
– Companies in the retail and food manufacturing industries spent 79.2 percent and 58.2 percent, respectively, of their net profits on share buybacks.
– McDonald’s could pay all of its 1.9 million workers almost $4,000 more a year if the company redirected the money it spends on buybacks to workers’ paychecks instead.
– If Starbucks reallocated money from share repurchases to compensation, every worker could get a $7,000 raise.
– With the money currently spent on buybacks, Lowes, CVS, and Home Depot could give each of their workers raises of at least $18,000 a year.

Relate:Are Stock Buybacks Starving the Economy?
Source: Annie Lowrey, The Atlantic, July 31, 2018

A new report finds that big companies could have given their workers thousands of dollars’ worth of raises with the money they spent on their own shares.

Viewpoint: Boss Can’t Be Janus Fix

Source: Chris Brooks, Labor Notes, July 25, 2018

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s Janus decision, a new approach to financing unions called “direct reimbursement” is gaining traction with Democratic politicians, academics, and even the New York Times editorial board.

It boils down to this: rather than public sector workers paying dues, their government employer would pay an equivalent amount directly to the union.

Proponents claim this approach will neutralize the impact of the Janus decision and shore up union budgets.

The idea has legs. New York’s most senior Democratic Assemblyman Richard Gottfried is sponsoring a bill to allow public sector unions to negotiate this scheme into their contracts. Hawaii is entertaining a version too.

Backed into a corner and fearful for the future, some unions might jump at this quick fix. It’s a big mistake.

Trump Launches War on Federal Unions

Source: Jim Campana, Labor Notes, July 26, 2018

Federal employees are at war with a presidential administration that’s bent on busting their unions. They rallied around the country July 25, their day in court as federal unions sue to halt three anti-union executive orders. …. AFGE, the Treasury Employees (NTEU), and other federal unions have filed suit in federal district court against the three executive orders that Trump signed on May 25, a Friday afternoon that will live in infamy.

How the Russian government used disinformation and cyber warfare in 2016 election – an ethical hacker explains

Source: Timothy Summers, The Conversation, July 27, 2018

The Soviet Union and now Russia under Vladimir Putin have waged a political power struggle against the West for nearly a century. Spreading false and distorted information – called “dezinformatsiya” after the Russian word for “disinformation” – is an age-old strategy for coordinated and sustained influence campaigns that have interrupted the possibility of level-headed political discourse. Emerging reports that Russian hackers targeted a Democratic senator’s 2018 reelection campaign suggest that what happened in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election may be set to recur…..