Podcast appearances and mentions of katherine baicker

Aurélie Ouss talks about how changing who pays for incarceration affects sentencing decisions. “Misaligned incentives and the scale of incarceration in the United States” by Aurélie Ouss. OTHER RESEARCH WE DISCUSS IN THIS EPISODE: The Collapse of American Criminal Justice by William J. Stuntz. "The rise in the disability rolls and the decline in unemployment" by David H. Autor and Mark G. Duggan. "Incentives to provide local public goods: fiscal federalism, Russian style" by Ekaterina Zhuravskaya. "Political Economy at Any Speed: What Determines Traffic Citations?" by Michael D. Makowsky and Thomas Stratmann. "Local Government Dependence on Criminal Justice Revenue and Emerging Constraints" by Shannon R.Graham and Michael D.Makowsky. "More Tickets, Fewer Accidents: How Cash-Strapped Towns Make for Safer Roads" by Michael D. Makowsky and Thomas Stratmann. "To Serve and Collect: The Fiscal and Racial Determinants of Law Enforcement" by Michael D. Makowsky, Thomas Stratmann, and Alex Tabarrok. "Finders keepers: forfeiture laws, policing incentives, and local budgets" by Katherine Baicker and Mireille Jacobson. "When Punishment Doesn't Pay: Cold Glow and Decisions to Punish" by Aurélie Ouss and Alexander Peysakhovich. "Correctional ‘Free Lunch'? Cost Neglect Increases Punishment in Prosecutors" by Eyal Aharoni, Heather M. Kleider-Offutt, and Sarah F. Brosnan. "Organizational structure, police activity and crime" by Itai Ater, Yehonatan Givati, and Oren Rigbi. "Incarceration and Crime: Evidence from California's Public Safety Realignment Reform" by Magnus Lofstrom and Steven Raphael. "Impacts of Private Prison Contracting on Inmate Time Served and Recidivism" by Anita Mukherjee.

We are back after a brief hiatus, and welcoming us back is this fine crossword by Laura Dershowitz and Katherine Baicker (edited by Joel Fagliano). The theme was a little on the high-brow side and a lot on the punny side, just what one would expect from a good Tuesday NYTimes crossword.  We have all the deets inside, so please, subscribe, download, listen up, and, as always, let us know what you think!Show note imagery: Various politicos with a fortunately-not-life-sized Euro commemorating Croatia's adoption of the currencyContact Info:We love listener mail! Drop us a line, crosswordpodcast@icloud.com.Also, we're on FaceBook, so feel free to drop by there and strike up a conversation!

Howie and Harlan are joined by health economist Katherine Baicker of the University of Chicago to discuss her career in academia and government, the landmark Oregon Health Insurance Experiment, and the optimal design for universal healthcare coverage. Harlan asks why life expectancy in the U.S. increasingly lags behind peer nations; Howie discusses the politics threatening the PEPFAR program, which has saved millions of lives around the world.  Links: U.S. Life Expectancy “How does U.S. life expectancy compare to other countries?” The American Health Care Paradox: Why Spending More is Getting Us Less Healthcare Policy Katherine Baicker: “Oregon Health Insurance Experiment” Katherine Baicker: “The Oregon Experiment—Effects of Medicaid on Clinical Outcomes” “How to Use the Oregon Medicaid Study to Your Ideological Advantage” Katherine Baicker: “Workplace wellness programs can generate savings” Katherine Baicker: “Health And Economic Outcomes Up To Three Years After A Workplace Wellness Program: A Randomized Controlled Trial” We've Got You Covered: Rebooting American Health Care Katherine Baicker: “A Different Framework to Achieve Universal Coverage in the US” Yale President Howard K. Lamar's 1993 Baccalaureate Address: “An Honorable Theatre of Action: Using A Yale Education in the 21st Century” PEPFAR The United States President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief “PEPFAR Reauthorization: The Debate About Abortion” Learn more about the MBA for Executives program at Yale SOM. Email Howie and Harlan comments or questions.

Howie and Harlan are joined by health economist Katherine Baicker of the University of Chicago to discuss her career in academia and government, the landmark Oregon Health Insurance Experiment, and the optimal design for universal healthcare coverage. Harlan asks why life expectancy in the U.S. increasingly lags behind peer nations; Howie discusses the politics threatening the PEPFAR program, which has saved millions of lives around the world.  Links: U.S. Life Expectancy “How does U.S. life expectancy compare to other countries?” The American Health Care Paradox: Why Spending More is Getting Us Less Healthcare Policy Katherine Baicker: “Oregon Health Insurance Experiment” Katherine Baicker: “The Oregon Experiment—Effects of Medicaid on Clinical Outcomes” “How to Use the Oregon Medicaid Study to Your Ideological Advantage” Katherine Baicker: “Workplace wellness programs can generate savings” Katherine Baicker: “Health And Economic Outcomes Up To Three Years After A Workplace Wellness Program: A Randomized Controlled Trial” We've Got You Covered: Rebooting American Health Care Katherine Baicker: “A Different Framework to Achieve Universal Coverage in the US” Yale President Howard K. Lamar's 1993 Baccalaureate Address: “An Honorable Theatre of Action: Using A Yale Education in the 21st Century” PEPFAR The United States President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief “PEPFAR Reauthorization: The Debate About Abortion” Learn more about the MBA for Executives program at Yale SOM. Email Howie and Harlan comments or questions.

How can public policy improve upon and fix the mess of U.S. health care? In a new book, health economists Amy Finkelstein (MIT) and Liran Einav (Stanford) argue that's the wrong question. Instead, they suggest we ask: What is it that U.S. health policy should try to accomplish?Finkelstein, also a MacArthur Genius grantee, joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss health care as a social commitment and to make the case for free, automatic, and universal coverage for a basic set of medical services. She argues why the current patchwork system of incremental reforms isn't the answer, why insurance is not the lever to reduce racial disparities in health inequality, and why we must “tear down the system and build from the ground up.”Finkelstein and Einav's new book, "We've Got You Covered: Rebooting American Health Care," is out now.Show Notes: On ProMarket, read:Lowering the Barriers to Entry for Economics Research in Healthcare, by Filippo LancieriRethinking How To Achieve Universal Health Care Coverage in the U.S., by Katherine Baicker, Amitabh Chandra, and Mark ShepardMore Than 20 Years of Consolidation Have Led to a Dysfunctional Health Care Market, by Martin GaynorThe Secret Driver of U.S. Health Care Costs: Politicians Wanting to Get Reelected, by Asher Schechter

For decades US policymakers have tried to achieve the universal health insurance coverage that many other developed countries enjoy. But despite incremental reforms, based on tweaking health insurance markets, America's uninsured population has remained stubbornly high. In a paper in the Journal of Economic Perspective, authors Katherine Baicker, Amitabh Chandra, and Mark Shepard argue that economists should move away from the paradigm that has inspired these past reforms and toward an approach that encourages wholesale change. They say that proposals should start from a basic, mandatory health insurance package, which can then be supplemented in markets for health insurance.  Shepard recently spoke with Tyler Smith about the success of health care systems using this framework in other developed countries and why economists need to rethink their approach to health insurance reform in the United States.

If there is something both sides of the political aisle can agree on, it's that there is something deeply wrong with health insurance in the United States. What they can't agree on is how to fix it. The right blames everything on the Affordable Care Act, while those on the left say we need Healthcare For All. But what if there was another option?In a recent paper published in JAMA, leading health economist and University of Chicago Provost Katherine Baicker lays out an innovative blueprint for health care—not to tinker with our system on the margins, but to redesign the entire thing. It's a fascinating idea that takes us through the complex history of health insurance, how that web got so tangled up and how we can straighten it out.Link to the advertised Chicago Booth Review podcast: https://www.chicagobooth.edu/review/podcast?source=cbr-sn-bbr-camp:podcast23-20230525

At the third anniversary of COVID-19 lockdowns, this episode takes a look at ongoing healthcare market failures and the pandemic's role in making them plain. Katherine Baicker, healthcare economist and newly appointed Provost of the University of Chicago, joins to take stock of the US healthcare system and discuss the challenges that remain.

Anthony Fauci has spent the past year trying to curb the worst health crisis the world has seen in a century.  In a recent University of Chicago event, Fauci reflected on how the COVID-19 pandemic has been a “painful learning experience” for he and other health officials. On this episode of the Big Brains podcast, please enjoy Fauci’s conversation with Prof. Katherine Baicker, dean of the Harris School of Public Policy, who presented him with the 2020 Harris Dean’s Award. Subscribe to Big Brains on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher and Spotify.

It’s long been thought in political science that giving people resources through government programs will get them more involved in politics. But this has always been a difficult question to answer in a controlled environment. That is until the 2008 Medicaid expansion in Oregon. There was an extensive research initiative done on the roll out of that expansion, and our boss and the Dean of the Harris School of Public Policy, Katherine Baicker, was involved. On this episode, we parse through the results with her to see if we can get a new perspective on this question.

Katherine Baicker, Dean at the University of Chicago's Harris School of Public Policy discusses a data-driven approach to policy making and the value that merging datasets across silos can bring to people's healthcare. Katherine also details her hopes for the future of research and policymaking and rethinking the modes of education to keep people safe.

The global pandemic has revealed critical gaps and weaknesses in the US health care system. How is our system structured and how did we get here? In part one of our deep dive into the health care system, Katherine Baicker and Pietro Tebaldi offer their insights into the dynamics that shape health insurance coverage in America. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dr. Katherine Baicker is dean of the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. Stephen Morrissey, the interviewer, is the Executive Managing Editor of the Journal. K. Baicker and A. Chandra. Do We Spend Too Much on Health Care? N Engl J Med 2020;383:605-608.

Under both pandemic and economic stress, how will the market perform when it comes to setting the price for effective treatments or a cure?  Katherine Baicker and Richard Thaler explore the economic forces that drive production and distribution of necessary goods like COVID-19 tests, and importantly, a vaccine See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Does visiting a bookstore put you at greater risk for infection than a fast-food restaurant? As states loosen lockdown restrictions on businesses, Katherine Baicker and Oeindrila Dube have developed a measure of which businesses pose the greatest risk for spreading disease based on factors like crowding, length of stay, and potential for touch contact. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The coronavirus outbreak has devastated many sectors of our society, and brought many of the issues we were facing before the pandemic to the forefront. This is especially true of health care. Prof. Katherine Baicker is a leading scholar in the economic analysis of health policy and dean of the Harris School of Public Policy. On this episode, she explains how the coronavirus is revealing how our public and private health systems need to change today and in the future to address this pandemic and the pandemics to come.

The United States is facing a range of challenging policy issues, from trade to inequality to climate change. The good news is that academic economists are doing cutting-edge work to help solve the challenges of the day, at the University of Chicago and institutions around the world. Over the past 20 years, there has been increasing momentum toward evidence-informed policymaking. While this seems promising, barriers still exist to bridging the divide between academia and government. On November 19, the Becker Friedman Institute for Economics (BFI) welcomed MIT Professor of Economics Abhijit Banerjee, recipient of the 2019 Nobel Prize in Economics and co-author of the forthcoming book, Good Economics for Hard Times. Banerjee joined a panel of experts, including UChicago's Katherine Baicker, Michael Greenstone and Steve Levitt, along with the Obama Foundation's Adewale “Wally” Adeyemo, to share their experiences and perspectives on the potential for economics to improve policy outcomes, the obstacles that exist to evidence-informed policymaking, and opportunities for improvement. Follow along with Banerjee's opening remarks and view his presentation: https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/CanEconomicsSavetheWorld_Presentation.pdf For more on the event, visit: https://bfi.uchicago.edu/event/can-economics-save-the-world/

One of the incredible perks of making a podcast at a place like the University of Chicago is the opportunity to feature some of the incredible guests who speak on our campus.  This week, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was here for a conversation hosted by Katherine Baicker, dean of the Harris School of Public Policy. On this episode of the Big Brains podcast, please enjoy Justice Ginsburg discussing her history and role on the Supreme Court.    

$8 billion. That's how much is spent on corporate wellness programs each year in the United States. Sadly, it seems that enormous amount of money doesn't actually improve employee wellness. And it doesn't save companies money either. Most of the time, when businesses add an extra layer of expense, they do so in order to grow their revenue or reduce costs. Theoretically, improving the health of employees would lower healthcare costs, reducing expenses, and improve productivity, improving revenue growth. Many companies have spent a lot of money on that theory, but the research shows that idea is nothing more than theoretical. According to the research, corporate wellness programs: don't reduce healthcare costsdon't reduce medication costsdon't improve measurable markers of individual healthdo cost a lot of money Even though many executives know this already, they feel like having an employee wellness offering is necessary for their brand. Since other companies offer it, they do it as well. It's kind of like "keeping up with the Joneses," corporate-style. Here's why corporate wellness programs don't work, and some thoughts to consider about what might. Recent Study: Effect of a Workplace Wellness Program on Employee Health and Economic OutcomesCorporate Wellness Clinical TrialDisappointing ResultsWhy Don’t Corporate Wellness Programs Work?1. Health and Fitness Isn’t A Foundation Of Company Culture2. Incentives Don't Inspire Action3. Wellness is Weak4. Lack of Employee AccountabilityWhat's The Right Answer For Improving Workplace Wellness? Recent Study: Effect of a Workplace Wellness Program on Employee Health and Economic Outcomes Zirui Song and Katherine Baicker published the results of a recent clinical study in the Journal of The American Medical Association. It's titled Effect of a Workplace Wellness Program on Employee Health and Economic Outcomes. The full paper and related study details is 123 pages. Not as long as the Meueller report on President Trump, but similar in its findings. Where the Meueller report found no evidence of collusion with Russia, Song and Baicker found no evidence of health benefits from an employee wellness program. Corporate Wellness Clinical Trial In the study, Wellness Workdays provided corporate wellness services to a portion of BJ’s Wholesale Club employees who were insured by Cigna. In all, just over 4000 employees were part of the “treatment” group, and another 4000 at other locations served as the control group. The offerings were pretty standard in the corporate wellness space: Personal health assessmentsIn-person screeningsEducational modules on nutrition, weight loss, cardiovascular health, stress management, and exercise, usually led by a registered dietitian. Employees were incentivized with $25-$50 gift cards for completion of various modules. In all, 35% of the employees participated in at least one educational module. Of those who completed one module, 61% completed three or more. I'm sure Wellness Workdays, BJs and Cigna all hoped for a positive outcome from the study. It would have made for great marketing. That's not how things worked out, though. Disappointing Results In the end, those who participated in the corporate wellness program faired no better in measurable health outcomeshealthcare spendingmedication costs Most fascinating to me, though, was that participants' perception was that their health improved, even though it didn't. United Healthcare came to similar conclusions in a 2017 survey. They found that 60% of employees who had access to a corporate wellness program believed the program had a positive impact on their health, even though the programs don't have much of an impact on health. When it comes to making healthier choices, our brains have a funny way of believing we're doing better than we actually are. Of course, some corporate wellness companies will look at the results of the study ...

In this episode, Harris Dean Katherine Baicker joins us along with panelists Nancy Tan, Alex Jeffery, and Sukriti Nayar.Credits: Jason Zukus, for hosting, producing, and editingPatrick Taylor, for scorekeepingJulian Lake, for engineeringNancy Tan, Alex Jeffery, and Sukriti Nayar for being fantastic panelistsJay Li, for cover artSpecial thanks to Dean Katherine Baicker and the Harris School of Public Policy!

In this episode, Harris Dean Katherine Baicker joins us along with panelists Nancy Tan, Alex Jeffery, and Sukriti Nayar.Credits: Jason Zukus, for hosting, producing, and editingPatrick Taylor, for scorekeepingJulian Lake, for engineeringNancy Tan, Alex Jeffery, and Sukriti Nayar for being fantastic panelistsJay Li, for cover artSpecial thanks to Dean Katherine Baicker and the Harris School of Public Policy!

Health care expansion. It's one of the most contentious issues in American politics. Katherine Baicker is Dean of the Harris School at the University of Chicago and one of the leading scholars on the economics of health care. Her research from the groundbreaking Oregon Medicaid Experiment has helped uncover the true costs and benefits of health care expansion. On this episode of Big Brains, Baicker shares the findings from the Oregon Experiment, and provides insights into how to improve health care for all.  Big Brains is available on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, and Google Play. Learn more at news.uchicago.edu

Host: Maurice Pickard, MD Guest: Katherine Baicker In early 2008, Oregon opened a waiting list lottery for a limited number of spots in its Medicaid program. From the 90,000 people who signed up, the state drew approximately 30,000 names of people who were allowed to apply to its Medicaid program. The results of this lottery have been studied over subsequent years, allowing researchers the ability to analyze the effect of expanding access to public health insurance on health care use and patient outcomes. Host Dr. Maurice Pickard talks with Katherine Baicker, Dean and the Emmett Dedmon Professor at the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago. She is one of the leaders of the Oregon Health Insurance Experiment, which investigated the effects of the Oregon Medicaid lottery. They discuss some of the conclusions from this study, including how a person’s increased exposure to health care through insurance coverage appears to produce significant, multifaceted, and nuanced benefits to one's health.

We talk about the Planet Money podcast episode 780, Reddit Change My View, Katherine Baicker changes her mind with science, Thomas Midgley and his one-man environmental disaster, and Netflix thumbs. Links from this episode: - Planet Money: Oil #1: We Buy Oil - Episode 780: On Second Thought - Reddit/Change My View - NEJM: The Oregon Experiment — Effects of Medicaid on Clinical Outcomes - What is Occam's Razor? - Senate healthcare bill: Read the full text - Pelosi: "We Have to Pass the Bill So That You Can Find Out What Is In It" - Single-Payer Health Care: America Already Has It - New Scientist: Inventor hero was a one-man environmental disaster - Al Gore: Inventing the Internet - Netflix Officially Kills Star Ratings, Replacing Them With Thumbs Up and Down

Health care has emerged as a hotly debated issue of the 2016 presidential election, with the Republican and Democratic presidential nominees expressing starkly different views on the Affordable Care Act (ACA). While approximately 20 million people have gained healthcare coverage since the law's passage, implementation has been marred by setbacks, including the withdrawal of some major insurers from the ACA marketplace. A new poll by POLITICO and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health shows deep ideological divides between the parties about the healthcare law, with a majority of voters saying they believe the law is failing. In addition, a recent announcement that healthcare premiums for some ACA plans will increase 25 percent on average next year has fed political debate. In this Forum event, expert panelists discussed the implications of the possible outcomes of the 2016 election. This event was presented in Collaboration with Reuters November 3, 2016. Watch the entire series from The Forum at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health at www.ForumHSPH.org.

Dr. Katherine Baicker is a Professor of Health Economics at the Harvard School of Public Health. Stephen Morrissey, the interviewer, is the Managing Editor of the Journal. K. Baicker and H. Levy. Coordination versus Competition in Health Care Reform. N Engl J Med 2013;369:789-91.

Katherine Baicker is a professor of health economics in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Harvard School of Public Health. Stephen Morrissey, the interviewer, is the Managing Editor of the Journal. K. Baicker and A. Chandra. The Health Care Jobs Fallacy. N Engl J Med 2012;366:2433-5.