In September, the Commonwealth Fund and the Rand Corporation released a comprehensive nonpartisan analysis estimating the impact of the healthcare positions of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
If Trump were to succeed in repealing the Affordable Care Act, millions would lose insurance in 2018, the analysis found, while Clinton’s proposed “enhancements” to the Act would extend coverage to millions more. Clinton’s plan would have zero impact on the federal deficit. Under Trump’s proposals, the deficit would grow.
Largely missing from the Rand/Commonwealth calculations is a comparison of how the two candidates would tackle reforms in the area of mental health. That’s because of a troubling asymmetry in data. Clinton has released a comprehensive mental health agenda, but Trump has provided almost no information — and it’s a shame. Nearly one in five Americans struggle with illnesses in this category, according to the National Institute of Mental Health. It’s a crisis Americans can’t afford to ignore.
Up to a point, legislative reforms have improved prospects for people living with these illnesses.
The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 forged a legal framework to guarantee people with mental health conditions the same access to care and coverage as those with physical conditions or injuries. Unfortunately, there’s little federal or state enforcement for the Parity Act. Meanwhile, numerous other shortcomings in our mental health safety net cry out for action.
This article was repurposed from Medical Marketing and Media. Read the rest of the article here.