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

CHAPTER 1. BANKRUPTCY 58
Table 1.7: The Effect on Premiums
Dependent variable: ln(premium)
OLS 2SLS
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Baseline instrument -0.098 -0.098 -0.074 -0.093 -0.111 -0.160
State controls
(0.059) (0.053) (0.038) (0.106) (0.107) (0.076)
Medicaid (share) -0.354 -0.289 -0.417 -0.617
(1.004) (0.794) (1.185) (0.890)
Income 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
Unemployment (share) -0.065 -0.540 1.120 -0.333
Additional state legislative factors
(2.675) (1.850) (3.060) (1.767)
Coverage mandates 0.003 0.000
(0.004) (0.004)
Any willing phamacists 0.058 0.031
(0.051) (0.058)
Any willing provider -0.026 -0.050
(0.060) (0.067)
Community rating 0.532 -0.016
(0.089) (0.070)
Guarenteed issue -0.450 0.091
(0.133) (0.135)
Charity care pool -0.140 -0.207
(0.060) (0.064)
Plan FE Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Instrument
Historical instrument Yes Yes Yes
R-squared 0.833 0.834 0.865 - - -
N 1,891 1,891 1,891 1,420 1,420 1,420
Notes: The dependent variable is the monthly premium for a 30-year-old non-smoking male
for plans offered by eHealthInsurance. The baseline instrument is mean log seizable assets
for a constant, nationally representative sample of households as though they lived in that
state. In the 2SLS specifications, mean seizable home equity under 1920 homestead
exemptions laws is used as an instrument. Robust standard errors clustered at the state
level in parentheses. Premiums inflation-adjusted to 2005 using the CPI-U.