Scholars have often commented that health policymaking in Congress is mired in political gridlock, that reforms are far more likely to fail than to succeed, and the path forward is unclear. To reach such conclusions, scholars of health politics have tended to analyze individual major reform proposals to determine why they succeeded or failed and what lessons could be drawn for the future. Taking a different approach, we examine all health policies proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives between 1973 and 2002. We analyze these bills ’ fates and the effectiveness of their sponsors in guiding their proposals through Congress. Set against a baseline of policy advancements in other policy areas, we demonstrate that health policymaking is indeed far more gridlocked than policymaking in most other areas. We then isolate some of the causes of this gridlock, as well as the some of the conditions that can help to bring about health policy change.
Research
Breaking Gridlock: The Determinants of Health Policy Change in Congress
Scholars have often commented that health policymaking in Congress is mired in political gridlock, that reforms are far more likely to fail than to succeed, and the path forward is unclear. To reach such conclusions, scholars of health politics have tended to analyze individual major reform proposals to determine why they succeeded or failed and what lessons could be drawn for the future.
