14.01.2013 Views

essays in public finance and industrial organization a dissertation ...

essays in public finance and industrial organization a dissertation ...

essays in public finance and industrial organization a dissertation ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

CHAPTER 1. BANKRUPTCY 28<br />

to seizable assets is 0.56. Includ<strong>in</strong>g controls for household demographics <strong>and</strong> uti-<br />

lization reduces this coefficient to 0.22 (column 2). Controll<strong>in</strong>g for wealth has little<br />

<strong>in</strong>cremental effect (column 3).<br />

The 2SLS estimates us<strong>in</strong>g the basel<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong>strument are shown <strong>in</strong> columns 4 to 6,<br />

add<strong>in</strong>g controls <strong>in</strong> the same manner as columns 1 to 3. With controls, the 2SLS<br />

po<strong>in</strong>t estimates are slightly larger than the correspond<strong>in</strong>g OLS specifications. In the<br />

preferred specification with controls for demographics <strong>and</strong> utilization (column 5), the<br />

elasticity of out-of-pocket payments with respect to seizable assets is 0.37. As before,<br />

controll<strong>in</strong>g for wealth (column 6) has little effect.<br />

1.6.2 Sensitivity Analysis<br />

Table 1.9 exam<strong>in</strong>es the sensitivity of these results to concerns about potential bias<br />

from endogenous asset exemptions. Column 1 adds controls for hospital <strong>and</strong> state<br />

characteristics. Because hospitals with different ownership structures may have differ-<br />

ent <strong>in</strong>centives <strong>and</strong> preferences for charity care, I <strong>in</strong>clude controls for the share of <strong>public</strong><br />

<strong>and</strong> nonprofit hospitals <strong>in</strong> each state (private hospitals are the omitted category). I<br />

control for Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) payments per 1,000 residents as<br />

these may affect <strong>in</strong>centives to provide unpaid care, the presence of state charity care<br />

pools, <strong>and</strong> the number of Federally Qualified Health Centers per 100,000 people. The<br />

parameters of <strong>in</strong>terest are virtually unchanged <strong>in</strong> these specifications <strong>and</strong> none of the<br />

covariates have coefficients that are statistically dist<strong>in</strong>guishable from zero.<br />

Column 2 uses the <strong>in</strong>strument that isolates variation due to contemporaneous<br />

homestead exemptions <strong>and</strong> column 3 uses the <strong>in</strong>strument that isolates variation due<br />

to exemptions for non-homestead assets with no effect on the parameter of <strong>in</strong>ter-<br />

est. Column 4 applies the <strong>in</strong>strument that isolates variation due to 1920 homestead<br />

exemptions. Us<strong>in</strong>g this source of variation addresses concerns that contemporane-<br />

ous asset exemptions may be <strong>in</strong>fluenced by unobserved state-level factors such as<br />

the strength of the hospital lobby or state-level attitudes towards charity care. The<br />

estimates are very similar with this <strong>in</strong>strument.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!