In current discussions of “procompetitive” approaches to health policy, the enforcement of antitrust laws in health care markets is a strategy that has attracted increasing attention: the filing of consumer-oriented health suits provides a means to “redress” the typically imbalanced “political market” in health policy. This study examines an important aspect of the antitrust enforcement process, the decision by a state attorney general to undertake an aggressive antitrust enforcement program in the health area. Three variables were found to explain this decision: the political needs of a “politician-supplier,” the organizational resources of a strategic institutional position, and the availability of a relatively favorable policy arena. An assessment of the future role of state attorneys general in this area suggests that their health antitrust initiatives will increase, but that various political and resource constraints are likely to inhibit their aggressiveness in pursuing these actions.
Skip Nav Destination
Research Article| June 01 1984
Redressing the Imbalanced Political Market for Health Policy: A Role for the State Attorney General?
Ronald C. Lippincott
J Health Polit Policy Law (1984) 9 (3): 389–410.
Ronald C. Lippincott; Redressing the Imbalanced Political Market for Health Policy: A Role for the State Attorney General?. J Health Polit Policy Law 1 June 1984; 9 (3): 389–410. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-9-3-389
Download citation file:
Don't already have an account? Register
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Could not validate captcha. Please try again.
Sign in via your InstitutionSign In
Citing articles via
Antitrust Law and Collective Physician Negotiations with Third Parties: The Relative Value Guide Object Lesson