Assistant Professor of Health Policy and Politics at @hsph.harvard.edu
I study how administrative burdens impede health insurance coverage, strategies to reduce these barriers, and the politics of health reform
she/her/Michigander

@adrianna.bsky.social
Assistant Professor of Health Policy and Politics at @hsph.harvard.edu
I study how administrative burdens impede health insurance coverage, strategies to reduce these barriers, and the politics of health reform
she/her/Michigander
Ran some quick numbers on this; in FFM states in 2026, about 1 in 10 people (over 340,000) applying for Marketplace coverage during open enrollment were determined to have incomes that qualified them for Medicaid or CHIP instead
Errant thought: Some share of Medicaid enrollments come through Marketplace applications (including on HealthCare.gov) because of the "no wrong door" policy.
Are Marketplace applications being updated to reflect work requirements, or will applications shunted to Medicaid trigger RFIs to enrollees?
Excited for this conversation in a few weeks on public health, health policy, and the election, featuring a few friends. You can register to tune in live!
Very excited to see that the team behind The Big Dig podcast is doing their next season on Romneycare
Have been wondering when we would start to see real numbers out of Nebraska (the only other estimate circulating, of 200 coverage losses in the first month, cites back to a guesstimate from a pre-implementation interview)
Can't make it work this time but maybe next time I'm around I'll come bother you for a hat!
the joumana billboards seem to have been toned down
my default facial expression when talking about work requirements
back in the place where the trees are just the right height
Must-read thread and article for health policy watchers - this letter from Paul Ginsburg, who was not only involved with MedPAC but also was the first executive director of the prior Physician Payment Review Commission, is particularly striking. www.statnews.com/2026/09/16/m...
Is there any precedent at all for Congress meddling in how MedPAC conducts analyses like this? I can think of some maybe-analogues for CBO — dynamic scoring, policy baseline instead of current-law baseline — but nothing like this for MedPAC.
As I opined then, both here and to STAT, it's not obvious to me that this boondoggle would survive legal scrutiny.
CMS, conspicuously, still has not put out a press statement about Trump's promise last week to send $500 checks to some unsubsidized Marketplace enrollees
This new research letter in @jamanetworkopen.com will be of interest to any interested in how upcoming OBBBA changes to non-employer insurance programs could affect those making up to 400% of the federal poverty level ($63,840 for 1 person and $132k for family of 4) jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...
New Census numbers show the number of people uninsured held steady in 2025.
BUT...That's before enhanced ACA premium subsidies expired, causing millions of people to drop coverage this year. And before Medicaid cuts start to hit next year.
www.census.gov/library/publ...
can’t believe Dan is back on the “sus HHS Secretary flights” beat
Adventures in "arbitrary and capricious" land!
(I do not have sufficient emotional bandwidth — or any other bandwidth — for human extinction discourse)
heckuva split-screen on AI headlines this week
(Also still not clear to me that this is legal, but that bar is in hell.)