For better or worse? The moral and policy lessons of Minnesota's HealthRight legislation.

Abstract

Minnesota's recently enacted HealthRight legislation places the state at the forefront of American health reform. How did the state manage to overcome the policy gridlock in evidence in other states and at the national level? And how well does the legislation fare under close ethical scrutiny? Among the most important factors that permitted Minnesota to enact reforms were the explicit linkage in the legislative debate of the goal of cost containment to the desire to expand access, the public perception that HealthRight is incremental and consistent with earlier reform efforts in Minnesota, and the lengthy public debate that preceded the enactment of HealthRight. Although it endeavors to create a fair and efficient health care system, it is not at all certain that HealthRight, in its present form, will achieve these normative goals.