certainly a need for more projects. >> okay. yes, please. >> i can't hear you. thank you for a terrific panel. two quick questions. is there an estimated 10 million kurds that live in iran. are they coming or do you expect them to come to help defend the k.r.g. and second, the "new york times" is now reporting via email that egypt is bombing libya. do you expect a similar action from them in iraq, syria? >> egypt and emirates. i'm glad they're doing something to their next door neighbor. we need a lot more in iraq and syria to win this war.

and i think it needs really deeper thinking on what it takes to do that. but if countries like egypt or emirates are on board, great. we have seen a lot of volunteers wanting to cross the border and the iranen government has stopped ian government has stopped them. what happened to yazidis really filled every sentiment. but iran would not allow them to come so easily and the kurds seem in iran are not in this picture that people are talking about. but this is a challenge. i think, again, iran will be well advised to have their own strategy to deal with them. but in terms of them crossing the board to help unless they do it illegally, there's no other way that they can. >> okay. yes.

>> you talked about strategy of aircraft supporting someone on the ground. so do you see the kurds doing this not only in the kurdish regions but into regions even reaching to mosul or do you think kurds will not take this step? >> the kurds will stop short of going into any traditional sunni areas. they cannot do it. they will not succeed. they will not do it anyway. so the answer is no. isis has to be removed by the indigenous people in every

place. >> okay. last two questions. the last question. >> okay. >> my question is if you don't mind telling us the border of the region called kurdistan and that's not currently part of the k.r.g.'s rule and if there are aspirations to include these in the future. >> the iraqi constitution defines k.r.g. as [inaudible]? >> iraqis accept that there are other territories that are traditionally kurdish. although they call them the strict territories by the way,

much of that is not disputed. so there are kurdistan areas where the kurds are either majority or entirely kurdish areas. but, of course, you cannot draw clear lines anywhere in the middle east between anybody. so the british probably took up a rule and drew that. maybe they couldn't have done that. whatever do you, you can't win. especially in the current climate. so in terms of the current -- and curdish control. you can't say k.r.g. control because kirkuk is not under kurdish control. so you can actually come up with a kind of demarcation, but it will not be very clear and will always be disputed. remember, the same happens

between sunnis and shiites. you can't draw lines. and articles include places in the south. it's a tough one. >> last question. >> i hesitated to ask this question which is why it's so late in the game. i guess it's kind of theory -- that he re-cal -- it would give people a freedom to move from group to group as they register for whatever it is they need to

decide. >> i've never been -- i'll give it a go. no kurd would agree to this. and sunnis want the whole of iraq. but when pushed these days, they are now actually fighting for federal status with territory and people involved. in other words, now there's a clear-cut solution. if i'm a turkman, christian, or yazidi, i would love your idea. but, again, the ones that are dominating the landscape will not agree to that. so it's not going to work. what is also difficult to achieve is what the kurds are asking for, and that is the federal arrangement because you can't have that within saloveren

country like iraq. come up with greater sovereignty, gain greater control over decision making given to each region. something close you're talking about is already in the constitution and that is each province can call itself a region. and then you can actually move between regions. you don't need an identity or whatever. this is already in the constitution. unfortunately, the current government of iraq that has been in power for eight years out of the 11 years, how many years saddam removed, 18 years out of the 11 years, eight out of constitution has done nothing to

implement the constitution other than be selective in its implementation. so the idea is that every iraqi would have hoped that by now, eight years of serving the country, building the nation, we would have had no trouble in now coexisting together. but, if anything now, iraq is broken and the sunnis are coming around after ten years asking for federalism that they refused initially. the kurds no longer want federalism, they want more. and the shiite in the south are also divided between them wanting different arrangements facing resistance. i think you got more than you asked for. >> thank you very much.

[applause] >> this is a pattern of abuse, a pattern of behavior that is not giving us any confidence that this agency is being impartial.

i don't believe you. this is incredible. >> i have a long career. that's the first time anybody has said you don't believe me. >> i don't believe you. >> i'm willing to remind you that it was not buried in 27 pages. most of that 27 pages is exhibits when asked about the -- >> being forgot coming is to say -- you know what, corre investigators, congress is investigating us. >> let him answer the question. >> i didn't ask him a question. >> yes, i did. >> i control the time. >> i realize that disrupting a hearing sort of -- come on. >> but the gentleman from wisconsin -- >> i control the time. he has the time. >> here's what being forth coming is. if we are investigating criminal wrong doing, targeting of people based on their political beliefs

and the e-mails in question are lost because of a hard drive crash which is apparently unrecoverable, and you don't tell us about it until we ask you about it, that is not being forth coming. >> that's not true. >> gentlemen has yielded back the time. >> thank you. >> tuesday night, we look into the investigation into irs targeting of conservative groups. that's at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> now body, a look at the implementation of the affordable care act in six states. this event was hosted by the state university of new york's rock feller institute. >> okay. let's get started. good afternoon. welcome to the national press

club. i'm tom gaze, director of the rockafeller research of public government. today's forum examines implementation of the affordable care act in the south. first, we're going to hear an overview of state's responses to the a.c.a. then we're going to hear from individual states, from their respective research teams. finally, we're going to have a wide-ranging discussion among four excellent analysts on what these experiences mean to national health reform. the reports and the forum come out of a 35-state study. the a.c.a. implementation network. this network is coordinated by a consortium of three institutions, brookings, fellows institute of government in pennsylvania. i'd like to thank the governing

institute and west virginia university for their assistance. and i'd like to thank c-span for broadcasting today's forum and for all those in washington who are not making news so that c-span stays with us. [laughter] >> we have a lot to cover today. to save time, i want to skip trying to summarize the biographies of our speakers. they are all impressive people. but if you want more information about it, about any one of them, we put a nice summary of their bios in the materials that you have. i think you just got outside of the room. also, they are the bios are up on our institute's website which is www.rockins.org. will you be able to find their

bios up there as well. you will also find on our website copies of all the reports that we're going to be talking about today. i also have a couple of requests. if you do ask a question, please keep it brief. we don't have that much time. and when you do want to ask a question, please raise your hand and wait for the microphone to come to you. also and probably the most important, this is a great time to power down your cellphones. finally, for media representatives, each of our presenters will be available another the end of the program. all right. enough for the housekeeping stuff. let's get into the discussion of the aca.

>> what happens in the state social security essential to the per norm mans -- and the region we're focusing on today is especially important. depending on how you define the south, between 41 and 46 people of the people without health insurance in the united states live in the southern states. if the a.c.a. is to achieve its purpose of expanding access to affordable and good-quality healthcare, it has to work in the south. so shed light on the southern states as well as other regions, we are issuing reports from scholars across the country. a couple of months ago, we released reports out of the western states. today we're releasing states on alabama, florida, texas, maryland, west virginia.

the researchers who have produced these reports come from a variety of disciplines. some are political scientists. some are economists. sociologists. some have many other nationalities, i suppose. but all of them have a deep understanding of the states they're studying. because they have lived and studied these states for many years. they also share a deep interested in documenting changes in the a.c.a. as some of you know conducting field research is a long-time tradition here. we've organized research networks that have studied job programs, welfare reform and many other national incentives. the studies vary a lot but there

are a few similar basic elements. first, they focus on implementation. second, they recognize the importance of federalism. on how federal and state governments cooperate or fail to cooperate with each other. third, they tend to be inductive. the reports cover a lot of grounds and draw from many sources in part because we want to be open minded in how the new law looks from the unique perspective from each state. and finally, they rely on a network to really understand whether and how a federal initiative has produced real change, it's critical to draw on a stable network of scholars scholars located in the states they're studying. this tradition began when my

prederecess so. -- pre-decemberer -- prederecess so -- prestdecessor -- today's report is an early stage in a long-term research process. this network is here for the long haul. the next step after we release all the states reports in september will be a conference in late october here in d.c. at. brookings institution. but enough background about the study. let's turn to the researchers and their findings. i first call on christopher

klein who can be distinguished by having been working with the institute for almost two decades now beginning back in 1996 with -- 1997, i suppose, with our welfare reform network. go ahead, chris. >> thank you very much, tom. good afternoon. like so many federal laws and programs that have gone before, the states are shaping the form and the function of the affordable care kitty. as thomas pointed out, our research network is focusing on state experiences and the implementation of a.c.a. and true to form in american politics, implementation provides yet another stage for shaping public policy. our baseline reports are helping

to illustrate how this is happening and sets the stage for future research. the research network is looking at the individual states, but as tom as alluded to, we're also interested in the regional dimension. today, we're focusing on the south. the united states census bureau defines the south as 16 states as well as the d.c. district of columbia. it goes to kentucky, oklahoma, maryland, delaware, and west virginia. to date, much of the attention on state responses is focused on the south. why? well, it's because many of these states and many of these states policy actions have been taken that have been interpreted to be in opposition to the a.c.a. the prevailing characterization is that -- sort sighted.

considering that many of a.c.a.'s provisions are most beneficial to states with health disparities stemming from a lack of insurance coverage, limited access to health services, and high levels of chronic disease, it would seem that these states would 'em embrace the new law. instead, they have not done so or if so, done so with

reservations. >> and administrative capacity and need should be taken into account. so too should underlying market and demographic factors. within all the states, there are countercurrents of support and opposition in the a.c.a. where opposition is present, some of the resistance is absolute based on partisanship, ideology, and philosophy. but it is likely to be aco accommodated with policy development and change and adjustment through experience. but the opposition is often conditional and so with this, we

want to look at some of the key factors involved. first, the partisan dimension. the most convenient opposition is found in ele -- elected state offices and majorities in state legislatur legislatures. in some states where the tide is running from blue to red, it can be difficult to get democratic candidates. the situation is complex, and we find that opposition varies among and within the southern states in degree as well as in rationale and motive. the south is not as solid as it might seem in its opposition. differences in opinion are present within the states themselves. not only between proponents and opponents of a.c.a., but amongst those who have reservations

about a.c.a. our field reports provide excellent examples of this turbulent network. opponents to a.c.a. in these states have not all times seen eye to eye in responding to the new law. they have also had differing views on how to move forward. for example, conservative governors may have differing views on how to move forward with medicaid options. such as hospitals, insurers and others may have an influence which tamps down partisan passions. for example, hospitals were key

in mobile liesing -- in the state of kentucky, they were very important allies in both medicaid expansion and establishing a state exchange. policy logic can be trumped by partisan passion, but over time, positions will likely -- persistent when they're exposed to the practical realities of a pluralistic society. it involves the interest of many well-established players. let's look at another dimension. state government, capacity, and history. we believe that one of the most important attributes of our

study is our ability to look closely at the landscape of past and current policy and administrative arrangements in each of the states. it is inadvisable to assume that all states start from the same relative position when implementing new law. apart from political considerations, past and contemporary policy experiences shape the terrain of implementation. while there are various aspects aspects of the a.c.a. in the south -- expansion opportunities. on the surface, it would appear that expanding medicaid would be a no brainer and that state refusals to expand it -- and, again, while not discounting the partisan dimension, there is more to the story. in some states, it's a big step. in others, it's a smaller step.

in state capitals, medicaid is known as a budget buster even with its general federal matches. medicaid is a problem that -- obligation. most states can point to times of fiscal crisis associated with the program. for some states, expanding medicaid further expands coverage to low income populations above the poverty line. states like maryland and delaware and the district of columbia have had per missive guidelines and are reaching the target population for that expansion. the same cannot be said for those southern states where medicaid eligibility for adults has been more restrictive. concerns about obligations even with generous federal funding appeared to be genuine. in short, medicaid expansion is

a big step in these states. in some of the states, the big steps are being made nonetheless including west virginia and kentucky. it also includes arkansas which has developed a private auction allowing people to enter the private insurance market with medicaid dollars. premium cost. states within and without the south are trying to find a third way to address some of the likets involved in medicaid expansion. approaches modeled along the arkansas model provide political cover but they also provide some reassurance that states will not overextended creating new systems or in scrambling to find providers accepting payments that might be lower.

beyond partisanship and politics, state opposition or reluctens to embrace the a.c.a. may be rooted in preexisting circumstances related to past policy practices and experiences. this is evident in the case of medicaid expansion. to be risk averse is not tantamount to be an obstruction nist. states with restricted medicaid in the past may be cautious about expanding the program. with time we are seeing oppositional stances modified as state leaders search for alternative mechanisms such as a private options. let's talk about markets and demographics, another factor influences state responses to a.c.a. just as the issue of medicaid expansion reflect issues. state experiences also tell us there is more to the equags than

just politics. what is notable in our field research is how market and demographic forces have shaped state level deliberations and action. when the a.c.a. was signed into law, a number of states signaled their intonet create their own state operated exchanges. it is safe to say that the conventional wisdom held that the federal exchange would be a fallback rather than a default choice and the states would actively pursue exchanges. we know this has not come to pass. as our field research con firms, much of this was for partisan reasons. there were other factors at stake that proved to be a real world test for this new policy design. for some states like west virginia which was one of the first states to authorize planning, analysis and the challenges of developing an i.t. system suggested that aon themy was not worth the cost. and there was a realsization the markets were impaired and this

raised warning flags of concern. it is significant in a number of southern states, especially those with substantial rural populations, the individual insurance market is less than ideal. the relatively poor health provile is unattractive to insurers so too is limited health care delivery capacity. low income and aging populations result in much of the payer mix being dominated by medicaid or medicare. in such circumstances insurers have relatively little leverage in negotiating pricing with providers who are motivated to off set the low reimbursement rates associated with publicly funded insurance programs. faced with these prospects some states were weary about taking on the responsibility of weak markets. to do otherwise could be perceived as a recipe for disaster leaving some state officials accountable for the failure of a new federal law.

from our current vantage point we recognize the operation of exchanges is not without their difficulties. states participating in federal or partnership arrangements have been able to indem fie themselves for the future. interestingingly we have two southern states that illustrate both the opportunities and challenges involved in establishing insurance exchanges. these are kentucky and mayor. one is held as a model of considerable success, that would be kentucky and another struggles and that would be maryland. some healthcare reform is more than politics. it's about fundamental economics that affect insurers, consumers and taxpayers. market conditions and demographic realities can help account for some of the turbulence that has emerged in the southern states. the ability of states to effectively manage exchanges may

be contributing to opposition. in conclusion a preliminary review of the south reveals that the opposition to the a.c.a. is the turbulent. there are different reasons and motives for opposition. partisan and political factors have influences action and reaction. so too have underlying factors related to past policies, administrative capacity and existing demographic and market forces. while looking at the past will help us understand the current situation, perhaps the most interesting paths are those focused on the future as we track the experiences of the states. given the complicated responses to a.c.a. across the country, the lessons of the south are likely applicable beyond the region. through this review it was my intention to provide broad context and perspective on our research efforts. we can learn more about the detail from our colleagues present today in the panel

discussion that will shortly get under way. i thank you all very much. [applause] >> thank you very much, chris. now let's get our panelist up .ere at the table so we have our experts here. they include michael from the university of alabama at birmingham. and michael will be the first speaker. for florida we have robert from florida state university. for kentucky julia from the university of kentucky and texas david warner from the university of texas at austin. for maryland jocelyn and for

west virginia more of christopher. so we're going to start off with michael. go ahead mike ling. >> thank you. alabama is probably best categorized as a state of passive resistance to the affordable care act and its many provisions. the state is not a rich state as i'm sure most of you are aware and it's basically made the decision that it's not spending money either to support or really to oppose the legislation. and certainly much of the opposition is philosophical but as was pointed out, much of the opposition really comes down to the nuts and bolts of how to play all of this out in a state that doesn't have a lot of revenue. first of all, it's clear alabama did not expand its medicaid program, even though there were strong economic incentives to do

so. but as it turns out, the states are on the hook for ultimately 10% of the additional healthcare cost. in a state like alabama , much of the revenue is earmarked so it's more heavy lifting than simply shifting the budget arrangements from one category to another. you have to negotiate moving moneys out of what are often long established trust funds to be able to make the sorts of expansions that medicaid would imply. with respect to an ultimate expansion, i suspect in alabama to the extent that its likely to happen and the governor has said he's not prepared to expand medicaid in its current form, but the use of medicaid managed care as an introductory way to change the dynamic and perhaps consideration of the arkansas model as a private option. that in alabama would playoff of the expansion of the children's

health insurance plan that was very successful in the 1990's. having said that as well, i suspect alabama is likely to khang it's stance on medicaid but only following states like texas and louisiana. with respect to the default exchange programs, alabama , as you know, is one of those default states. i think that came about and originally the governor and legislature were in favor of establishing a state based exchange. but as this played out, there was lack of guidance from the federal government and the states are on the hook for the administrative cost in 2015 fa going forward. that provides a lot of financial risk to any state and certainly a state that is low in revenues. and having said that the federal default exchange is the sort of exchange the state was considering in the first place. it seems unlikely to me that

alabama will move away from the federal default. and finally alabama is a state with very few insurers and indeed as the affordable care act played out, only one, blue cross, blue shield was present in all of the markets. another is present nonl three counties. we expect some expansion over time. small insurers have been reluctant to enter the market. and united healthcare has at least filed to be willing and ble to provide coverage in 2015. but as an overview that is alabama. >> in contrast to alabama , florida has been opposed aggressively to the affordable care act. the current governor spent $5

million of his own money to oppose the passage of the affordable care act. you're all aware i think that the florida attorney general was the first person to file suit against the constitutionality of the act. the governor and the legislature have made it difficult to implement the act after passage. there is a continuation of opposition in the face of i think 983,000 people who have enrolled through the exchange and i expect this kind of opposition to continue because it's been largely philosophical and political. there were two or three things that were striking to me in the opposition of the affordable care act. one was the willingness of the governing party to abandon commitment to a core teach feature of this philosophy when these were associated favorably

with the affordable care act. secondly, the extent to which the governor and the legislature fought implementation of the affordable care act with tactics and strategies that have been widely used in the state in other areas of public policy. thirdly, the willingness of the legislature to deny the expansion of medicare -- medicaid to citizens when some of its leaders had used these benefits in their own family. a couple of examples, you're all aware a big part of the governing philosophy of the republican party is competition will produce public policies more cleeply and more effectively. marco rubio, when he was speaker of the house supported this policy and even suggested an exchange similar to the affordable care act for medical

care in the state of florida. this was timely adopted in 2013 in the same year they opposed the exchange in the affordable care act. secondly, when florida failed to don't an exchange and tried to put into place the federal exchange, they began to use the navigators the federal funds supported. navigators had been used in fla for years to proet mote education -- promote education about particular public policy. they tried to oppose their use with regard to the affordable care act. the legislature put on pretty extensive licensingings restrictions on the navigators. the governor tried to close the to navigators.

several bigger counties rebelled claimed that county health documents are not they continue but the county se and healthy agencies tried to governor's the actions were like southern yore who stood in prevent of schools to public integration. finally, the expansion of argued against by the then speaker of the house, who suggested that people who that kind of coverage should find medical emergency charities.rivate -- he said his family had used those when his fighting unsuccessfully against cancer. questioned by n

reporters, said they had used he medically needed provision of the medicaid law. denied ker initially this, said his father was wrong. -- his father suggested that he was right. but peaker admitted this continued to oppose expansion of medicaid. i suspect that this opposition will continue. a little more muted now than it had been earlier for a political reasons. one, they are now close to one enrolled in the healthcare exchange. two, some groups have come support the expansion of medicaid like florida medical in the ion that had not past. thirdly, probably most a big ntly, there was election coming up in florida the likely democratic

candidate whom some of you may republican e the governor of florida, is now aggressively pushing the care act and the urrent governor is not responding as aggressively as he i suspect because of these other changes. one other change that is coming about. legislature allows its speaker to serve only one term. the speaker who fought the ssfully against affordable care act last session will be gone next year. those kinds of developments will but ly change the response not the philosophy of the opposition. texas there's been quite a lot of opposition to the act.dable care the texas legislature meets for

every odd year, so it s really only in session from around the 8th of january until end of may. governor, everyone has said, has not much power. out, the way the legislature works is that in the ng gets passed last two weeks and he has until roughly father's day to veto wants. and only he can call the session, andback in only to consider things he wants them to consider. in many ways the governor has way more power than almost other governor. and in this case, in 2011 there an exchangeo set up and -- which was initiated by a from houston.

nd the governor basically said no and it went no further. there e thing in 2013, was a bill from the same number of other interests to expand medicaid and said no.basically at the same time, in the interim elections and 2 taking had senator cruz very strong stands, which i think will make it somewhat going forward. legislature the about to be elected is conservative more than the legislature we have had that possibly would have done it. t the same time, the hospitals and medical association to a certain extent, and especially cities, which is where a

ot of the match comes from medicaid and it comes because state general revenue and things like isproportionate share dollars, upper payment limit dollars, the replaces has to all be matched from taxpayers they ix big cities, and have other responsibilities. o there is definitely some economic interests in not only paying g medicaid but adequate medicaid rates, the ially as you have being phased out. rollout of th the the affordable care act governor asked for much bigger increases in constraints on

avigators, which really led to most activity being done by counselo pplication counselors, who through an earlier case were established to federal of the exchan exchange. so, if you had a state exchange state regulation of such people, but you don't that. so, in some ways the ability of kind of nment to constrain sign-ups was mitigated feds do g the everything. estimates are that there are 1.3 million people who are below the o are federal poverty level in texas eligible be otherwise for medicaid and are now not eligible for any subsidies on exchange. holder, re a green card you are eligible for the

xchange and basically very low cost coverage. think that a number of the 700,000 plus who signed up in population andat also in the near poverty population. billy hamilton, who is a former assistant comptroller for a of years, estimated that billion over 10 years texas could draw down another in federal money just through medicaid expansion. $15 billion would be offset by increased tax receipts from the population and, of course, could also be modest hospital 75% of the lmost states have because that's a for them to use federal

money to match federal money. possibilities.me there's a lot of talk about a solution, but there's not much concreteness about that. a senator who d is a democratic candidate for lieutenant governor called for a exas solution and it will be interesting to see how that developments in the months to come. you for the opportunity state rt on kentucky's kynect.wn as connect it been so successful? e are asked this with some frequency as you might imagine.

importantere are four factors. the quality of leadership. the system implementation and just a basic demographics we a lot of low income -- or income uninsured people in kentucky. leadership. our u may be aware, governor has been unwavering in support of coverage unabasheded he has taken no criticism on this. he appointed a group of public d, experienced servants in the best sense of out standistanding stuff ho had done big complicated things before.

c co- second, the system design is .onsumer friendly aspects first, you don't have to set up an account. reveal t have to everything about your house hold composition to browse the system. ou don't have to enter things repeatedly that are entered once and is used to determine eligibility for medicaid or support, cost-sharing support, and the choice of plans. third, and i kaepcan't emphasiz enough, meticulous hands-on implementati implementation. in the physical

a lot of it represents problem solving and ability to repeatedly test bits, test big things and -- as the system up and change force -- the fly and -- kpwg going to need to use i my crib sheet -- we have lots of eligible for coverage. about a half million people as enrolled nth in through kynect. population of kentucky is something like 4.3 million. so, a half million people in and cky is a lot of people

the health were in the balance in the aid and i hope you saw made by the human and health services and if not the table. is out on thank you very much. little oing to talk a bit about maryland, which like kentucky is an outlier but is an outlier on the national level. like most of the southern states a lot of states in the u.s. maryland was way well prepared for implementing the a.c.a. the day after the law was signed the governor announced the care ing of a health coordinating council that was going to oversee the entire so they were clearly pwrepld. the legislature was supportive. state, a democratic

democratic governor, democratic legislature for a long time and supportive.ery they quickly passed the legislation needed to move this forward. decided to build its own exchange and that is part of on. i'm going to focus in terms of the implementation actors that a lot of us focus on in our work and have been discussed pretty explicitly in kentucky we have a strong political support and supplemented by the fact that o'malley had n presidential aspirations, wanted bona fides if you will with a successful lawful of the a.c.a. e was also concerned about who was going to succeed him so he was groom being the lieutenant governor on this brown. was his signature policy. he was put in charge of everything. challenges rted the post-failure and is indeed the goc.ratic candidate for support was ical clearly there unlike most of the

southern states where opposition solidly entrenched in partisanship partisanship. leadership, policy ntrepreneurship which we talk about in implementation clearly present. wonk.vernor is a policy the lieutenant governor is a olicy wonk and the person who spearheaded the effort was the secretary of mental health and the state, well connected in d.c. in h.h.s., a a pediatrician who had ecome famous fighting cold medicine over-the-counter sales. so, these people all understand politics.d those pieces were clearly in place in maryland. capacity on the part of the state they have the resources. this is a relatively wealthy state. they have a history of innovation in healthcare. healthcare in the

fortunately of an all payer determines reimbursement for all hospital services. they have done there for a long time. this doesn't happen elsewhere in country.h or the they have a generous medicaid program and they had a good thatt with plenty of plans were willing to participate. those factors are all there. cheerleading sort of perspective you would say wow, everything is in place. what happened? was a horrible monumental failure that really to the infrastructure of the exchange itself, the i.t. maryland is among the lowest of the states in eligible nrolling people as a result. horrible outcome for what i think was a pretty good planning process but much remains to be learned about there. why did the exchange fail? i can't tell you that. all thethink anyone has answers.

there's a legislature post-audit study under way. the g.a.o. is looking at this. answers that will be forthcoming but a few we can was the plan ow, too ambitious? this was a very big infrastructure project that was connect everything with regard ton a applicant. a lot about hear the federal exchange applies to maryland. things were moving so fast and made at the last minute, there was not enough time for consumer testing. a very rushed atmosphere. the contractors were fighting to the press and other accounts. and there may have been a lack consumer side the of things at the very top of the exchange leadership. , high profile resignations. the leader of the exchange failed. went on vacation after the launch and was lampooned and was sector, well te

trained for this work but maybe not as politically savvy. she was replaced recently by the person who headed up this effort office.governor's sharpstein is leaving in january to join the school of ublic health at johns hopkins so he will be gone but he will be here through the launch of the new system. system? the new not the federal exchange. they decided to completely scrap exchange and they will get for free code from the connecticut exchange system that successful.ry that is what is envisaged for the november launch. that i'm asking as i go forward is, is this just bump in the road or really a monumental blemish for maryland? what i know on maryland is going to continue to strides.and make huge i think it is a bump in the big bump s a pretty but i think it is limited to

that. thank you. >> hi. i'm going to talk about west virginia and then i'm going to take a minute or two to talk work that our colleagues have done in south carolina. ou have already heard that the narrative is not simple. there are many complex story lines. story lines occur in the states themselves. a.c.a.y ways the story of implementation in west virginia is the story of two reforms. reform dealing with the decision not to operate a exchange but to actually federal-state partnership arrangement. he second is a tail of reform about medicaid expansion. as i mentioned in my opening remarks, west virginia was one those states that took a big step in terms of the expansion of medicaid. a moment or two to talk about these two tales of reform. west virginia looked carefully

at establishing its own state exchange. it was one of the first states o actually authorize the establishment of a planning group to look into there. role and layed a there's no doubt about it. many of us know that relationships between west irginia and federal government over such things as environmental policy create some strains. in west virginia, west virginia is nominally a democratic state a very conservative democratic state so there is a partisan dimension to this. engaged in fairly substantial study and research in the options it had creating its own exchange. and, as a result of actuarial nalysis and as a result of looking at some of the complexities of putting together i.t. opted not to establish its own exchange and instead to a federal-state partnership. it is a fairly hands off the side of west

virginia. the state has not been pro theve per se in advertising healthcare insurance exchange, instead relying on the federal as well as relying on various nongovernmental state.ediaries across the so, the state has taken a hand off approach to the exchange exchange.artner in the but it has not been a hostile passive but more of a position. now, let's look at one of the a.c.a.mportant aspects of for west virginia and that is medicaid expansion. state wrestled with the decision whether or not to expand medicaid. arguments about some some fiscal constraints, of the healthcare access constraints discussed in other beyond n the south and were also discussed in west virginia. fter a considerable amount of analysis as well as motivating he support of key stakeholders such as the west virginia

hospital association, west virgin virginia, namely the governor, decided to expand medicaid. you have two different paths in one state of expansion of while holding back on the health insurance exchange. the balance reveals and tension that sometimes exists between politics and pragmatics. wanting to make certain you are able to deliver while at the having some issues to deal with with politics. decisions were made, another important story line coming out of west virginia line about medicaid expansion and enrollment. west virginia has been by other states as well and by some national observers that it has been very in reaching out and getting folks who would be enroll.e for medicaid to west virginia did this primarily relying upon its own and istrative structures

practices. the state scoured its food stamp enrollment list and used that as a way to identify and arget individuals who might be eligible for medicaid. when we put together our reports and we last year -- were really pulling them together in the last week of the 2014 -- by january of some 82,000 people had been added to the medicaid roles in virginia. that is now significantly higher. that is a pretty significant jump. so, west virginia very quickly rofrpls. of two one where the state decided to hold back on expansion -- i'm establishing the exchange while pursuing the medicaid expansion. just a moment to talk about our colleagues in south carolina who were not able today.ere christina dangerous and marisa a ngling have put together very informative report that is available out front and i you pick it up.

a couple of comments i would make about their study -- of a much bettere in position to discuss it than i am but two important points. narrative in south carolina also follows some of the more oppositional or states in that much of what has happened in south carolina does partisan dimension to it and it does deal with some disagreements amongst key stakeholders. but there's another story out of south carolina as well and again support to this observation that over time stablished private interests such as hofpts and the business community may have a moderating responses tate because there has been a colonel legislation of interest in south carolina who have been in medicaid expansion. so the big take away for south something and it is mentioned already in the presentation -- is that the situation is in flux. i think that is probably a good way to end things. thank you.

very much.u i have a few questions. is goings like if there s and sort of greater medicaid n in a.c.a. expansion sounds like there is the likely to give than establishing state exchanges. generally correct? exactly k that is right. but the issue, of course, is hat the subsidies that come to the states with medicaid expansion are a ticking clock. that 2014 is ent essentially over for purposes of 100%nsion that is a year of federal support that is lost to

the states. on, the as time passes economic case in terms of conomic development for medicaid expansion starts to shrink. >> does it seem so far that the states are ok with the operation the federal government as in operating the exchanges? one of the interesting things about it is i think originally viewed this alternative federally run exchanges as a pretty aggressive ederalism, as kind of a punishment for states that are not willing to go forward and own exchanges. but it sound to me like at least in alabamainia quite ly, that they were

deliberative about the idea of allowing the feds to take over operating ibility of the exchange. so it doesn't sound like that punishment.h of a are there other concerns about attack on state control? -- hracian the old saying there's the old saying that in politics and policy making there unintended consequences and the initial thought was maybe federalo fall back to a exchange would be punitive but i don't think that has been the result. is more he result important states may have an interest, state governments or officials. i don't think the exchanges are the hot button topic for the officials as for the insurance companies, healthcare providers as well as the respective the states. i think that what we saw in the obviouslylot of blame was tended on the federal

you see t and what going forward is some accommodation happening where there be bumps in the road. of my colleagues is what emerging cerns may be with re-enrollment and what have you. but i think a very important narrative regardless of the states, whether there are tate insurance exchanges or relying on the federal marketplace is the role of ongovernmental entities, intermediaries who are playing a very active roll in helping to avigate and assist individuals in enrollment. i think they have played a crucial role. i know in west virginia they have. and it has been a very robust response. however, in a case like west much of that information role and assist role as focused on medicaid enrollment rather than enrollment in the individual insurance market. this also whether even relates to the recent

ontradictory circuit court decisions, the d.c. federal court, about inia a.c.a. about in what is an exchange established relates ate and how it to application of the individual of the machine date. -- mandate. some of these states that you have been -- at leastear that appears to be the case, that the role of xchange, the the federal government in running the exchange was pragmaticically by the state so in some ways it was the exchange established by the state. i don't know whether that is oing to convince any federal judge, but it does seem like a in ly conscious decision many cases.

i know there was some possible texas soluti solution. o you see -- we do have a couple of states, both in florida and texas, that are opposed to the a.c.a. still. politics may , change. ut do you see much likelyhood that -- lookly hood that the arkansas has that been able to use, at least been to be to use, is likely effective in working out some sort of compromise between the federal government and states? >> i think that the federal government will probably need to for n it up a little more texas to be on board. he indiana system seems to basically, if you take the de

medicaid and you are in a mandated population, then you co-pays, e to pay any so forth. but they have also something a small premium and i think you also get a saving account. and if you do the healthy things you then pposed to, are eligible to keep the money in the health savings account. and then somewhat -- i think that has some possibilities. now, it might need to go a little further. will say that governor perry, when he was really railing things, wrote the ommissioner saying i want a directive that will enable texas offer more cost effective

efficient medicaid program. to he things that it had include was reduce the tphaonee grant -- reduce the need to get federal approval for changes in the state medicaid plan. allow asset and resource testing. allow six-month eligibility with renewal. encourage personal responsibility including co-pays all kind of things. looks senses it almost like he would like a block grant so he wouldn't have any tax medicaid program. that is kind of of an extreme, which i would think the federal go to.ent would not > one point on what david has said, i think the issue of the fed sort of providing greater lexibility with respect to waivers of medicaid expansion is likely to be received favorably some of the southern states particularly as it focuses on and the responsibility requirement for contributions to

co-payments for that are associated with the use services, ealth whether those are large or not. the ability to put those in, i will go a long way to southern states to sort of see a compromise that might be possible. do we have any questions from the audience? anybody want to bring anything up? y yes. hold it just a moment, please. we want everybody to use the mic. you.k you >> i'm rachel fay with the national campaign to prevent pregnancy. i was interested in what you were talking about with regard to expand medicaid going down as the year passes 100% u miss out on these match rates.

i'm wondering how that interacts with the conflicting pressure upward from cuts what that is role in these policy debates in some states that have been resistant. > the dish payments are disproportionate share payments that largely go to hospitals and net providers to care for the uninsured. under the legislation much of away.goes frankly, i think that some breathing room that states close not to expand medicaid has the federal government has delayed imposing of the teeth that goes with that. so, that took some of the that the hospital associations particularly in the states that had been mounting to stand medicaid -- expand medicaid. shifting is sort of incentives on both side. the inly the dish loss or biggest sort of countervailing

force to the reduction in the contributions. >> any other questions? ok. next n't we bring up the group. thank you very much. we have an wonderful

panel. i wouldel in particular not bother to try to relate buyiiographies. brookings.n from the the rd nathan with rockefeller institute and senior fellow now. tuart butler of the heritage foundation for the moment. joining ll soon be alice at the brookings institution. sarah kliff. group.n extraordinary i will not -- i'm sure they have opening remarks or thoughts on these issues. of the deal with any questions they want to deal

with. one overarching question i would like it deal with at some conversation is what can we expect out of the south? some going to expect greater cooperation down the road? and if we are not expecting it nder the current laws and regulations, waivers, et cetera, -- or what do to might be possible, what kind of to extend ht occur the a.c.a. implementation and to improve on it? alice, why don't you begin. anybody k that if needed an illustration that the care act is not just ne big federal program, it is the states 51 -- and the district of columbia -- eparate programs with very different characteristics and up

against different opportunities obstacles. we already got that today. the affordable care act as you all know is the culmination of a to expand le to more e coverage americans. we have been doing this for decades. anything in the easy way in the united states. bill at have passed a some point as many countries did that just said everybody is healthcare and it is going to be a federal program. ut that would have been much too easy. pieces, and for good reasons. because we have a distrust of because overnment and we have a vibrant federal system things states who do differently. so, here we are. but it also

creates an enormous opportunity on earn from what is going n these different places, not just because of academic interest, but because this like any major social containi hange, is going to play out over a long time and we have to to n from the experience ake it work better and hopefully even to learn how to make government programs in better. in american point public policy is implementation. tend to think, oh, yes, argue bout what should be the policy and debate it and pass a law and then we are done. not done at all, we are just starting. heard today have

illustrates that. a, i think we are moving into new phase of trying to figure and what doesn't and how to fix it. innumerable questions, some of which came up this that could be answered by looking at how the different things.re doing what kinds of outreach works best best? and that is a clear illustration you have a cause federal exchange doesn't mean that it is going to work the alabama that it state.n some other it makes a difference who gets and helps people enroll. what difference do the rules about network adequacy make? one reason this is so

complicated is we don't have ational regulation of insurance. a lot of kupblgts -- countries we don't. we regulate insurance at the state level and this is insurance. going to be different in different places. what difference does the history of the state relationship state and federal government make? of whole thing is full surprises. jocelyn talked about the surprise in maryland. pointed to this being a huge success. it was a terrible failure in initial rollout. why was that? nd maybe we don't know what points to a huge success. we only thought we did. to answer all of these kinds of questions, it is very valuable people on the ground with serious knowledge of how operates and what outs and d

peculiarities are. gives us his network is exactly that, people who have worked in the state, know what s going on and then the challenge is to turn that nowledge into something more than interesting anecdotes of istory of a particular state but to figure out how can we learn from this variety of make the whole thing better. alice.k you very much, you made a lot of key points here.why aware i'm sure for people who are watching this and listening to take in. a lot to i have been over my career working with many people in this in the country on doing studies like this of new policies. i had never seen a challenge as as this one, and i'm not a young guy. have, as alice said, a

is hard to n and it s get your hands around it. been today's program has helpful. the important thing is what tom alice rivlin said. this is not going to happen tomorrow or next week or next month. such s a change of magnitude that it is important a long period of ime to look hard at what this law does in ways that go beyond at this time.ow some predictions are that it ill take 10 years, 15 years, even longer, before healthcare is affordably changed, its delivery is technology is changed, the treatment systems are changed. took us a ou -- it

long taoeuime, the last piece oe in america y net took longer than in any other in the al free country world and we now have a law and a pite efforts to repeal it, lot is happening and it is rolling out and it will roll out kocome in which people like the people you heard in today who are communiti communities, know the people there, know the politics know the history there. this at we hope is that network, this implementation network, can add value, an contribute and produce what you might call the missing ingredie ingredient. over time -- because our field researchers are for real. i hope you have seen that. out there. they know the scene. they are watching it closely. written preliminary

papers. so, now where are we in our work? we've looked so far at the the big made, challenge for us and main aspose for us going forward, lice said, is cross-cutting multistate studies to use this network to have the field to major s contribute that ch analysis papers our network will produce on hings like what is the i.t. syst system? why does it work in some places not others?y and what are the economic effects of the new networks that insurance and health maintenance bargaining to re set up and get customers? and doestitive is this competition help people to make -- to make ountry

healthcare more affordable to keep people out of hospitals, to eep people out of emergency rooms. these are really big things in life, in government and for the economy and for finance.t we are going to be studying out rea reach. just do outreach to navigate and help people get signed up. live with help them there. their addresses change, their be ins change, their change -- their incomes change. these new systems that didn't work in maryland and are places, bigger r than amazon, bigger than getting an airplane reservation. bring the to technology to the poor in healthcare in a way that makes more affordable, more accessible and makes systems better to do things that help people stay get hy and not just

treatment when they are sick. o, this is, in my lengthening lifetime as much fun as i have ever had doing research with the kind of people you have heard today. and we have 61 people in 35 working on this. and we are adding some. us.iana is going to join and i would like other states, i would like the network to bring people in. indiana, as i think mike mentioned -- no, dave, you it -- very savings ng, using this you nts approach where incent people who have money to wise decisions because they have a financial stake. i s is a bigger subject than can possibly allude to in my ti ime, which has probably

expired. but thank you all. expired. >> thank you very much. as you emind everybody start thinking about what if the -- what are the likely future that in the might affect this region that we are going to have an election mean november which could some exchanges in the senate. going to urse, we are have an election, a presidential election, in 2016. say i can announce here today that the next president of the united states obama.ot be barack and that is important in the sense that whoever is the next have quite the't same pride of authorizeship of a.c.a. as the current administration. so i think it is important to be a e that there could somewhat different environment in washington with regard to the issues or the passes that have been mentioned this afternoon. just want to suggest sort

of three areas or make three oints in that regard as to how things might develop in there region and maybe further in the future. first, and chris plein and made reference that you have seen a number of southern have opposed expansion of medicaid but some private option that would have the functional equivalent of covering those same people. arkansas and florida, south carolina, tennessee and texas a great deal of interest in finding some form of rivate coverage through the exchanges using medicaid dollars nd it has been mentioned that indiana, of course, as you mentioned, going down a very similar road. so, i think you could well see n the next few years a move toward making that more possible, going back to those tates and saying, well, what would you need to go this

direction? if you are not prepared to medicaid what can we do law rms of exchang changes in e but administrative changes. it is quite possible if you look victory in the senate now, this year and maybe in the presidential election, to a is to move restructuring of medicaid itself a more t least in part cash based private coverage system in the future. that is one thing to think about as it affects what you have heard. it has been said that the federal exchanges that we southern states are not sort of a penalty, a slap across the wrist but really are seen as an alternative way exchange.g an and that might develop further the future of more customized federal exchanges at the state level addressing some of the and other issues the

states have already raised and ou could see sort of a resetting of what it means to have a federal exchange in those you actually at could see very active state the future.n >> the third point is that in when the next president takes office, another major affordable care act goes into place, the wide and brown provision that would allow very changes and significant a lity of states to propose different way to reach the goals and objectives of the affordable care act. that provision will allow states to get the agreement of federal changes or o make eliminate the individual mandate, the employer mandate, is exchanges themselves. so you could see a raft of and other states

coming to the federal government and saying we actually want to that you e objectives laid down in quite a bit of a different approach, different reflects our situati situation, our particular politics and our our philosophy. of 2017, 2018 d could see some very wide differences in the southern tates and other regions that reflect what you have heard today in terms of why the states are either passive or aggressive bstructionists to the current arrangement so that you could see the end result of people insured at a reasonable cost of both those individuals nd the federal government playing itself out in ways that reflect what you have heard today. >> i don't think i could have taken a more intimidating group end of soto go to the i will try to be brief.

when i think of the future of affordable care act i almost in a bit of s tension in one. ne is the idea of experiment stati ation and testing the limits of what the affordable care act looks like. at what states have been done with medicaid expansion it seems like they are seeing however they can push the obama administration. republican states have a bargaining chip. they get to decide whether they expand medicaid and we have seen and indiana that the obama administration is willing to bend pretty far to states into the fold. so i think we will see more states learn from one another what the administration is ok with, if new administration with different political means they will approve different we get to the en wide and brown waivers in 2017 i hink you will see lots of changes.

i was up in vermont recently and payer anning a single system. that is what they want in 2017. think you will see a lot of variety in how states are handling the affordable care t act. in contrast to that is a bit of a calming down over the trors affordable care act. i feel like i already see this job. day-to-day a year ago it was -- i worked at a newspaper then but it was get a front page story on obama care. right now this is just not the fight that it used to be. my s still controversy but experience i had one story that is important in my experience spent time in the "washington ost" archives where i used to work the rollout of medicare and edicaid in 1965 and one thing that struck me there is how were.ical seniors they profiled one guy knocking

door to door trying to sign people up getting the door in his face yelling i don't want whatever you are selling and people were skeptical. a.m.a. was trying to appeal it and you go forward now you can't imagine seniors saying no plead care. i think if we take the long view it makes me think that there some convergence around the act as a settled piece of law and we will see a lot of it looks like.at >> i'm going to open it up to q&a for other people but i have question.f the maryland experience is fascinating to me. i don't know whether maryland southern state group but it is a good report so it out so thank you, jocelyn. that is interesting maryland really does, as jocelyn pointed out, have all the ingredients of sort of expecting good implementation

outcome. they had the leadership, they capacity,esources, the everything else going for them. work.t didn't i'm sure they will get it to work at some poeupint at some level. but it is fascinating. and i was wondering whether that might suggest something about task that mentation is different from some of the implementation tasks of some types of programs we have -- previous times of programs we have dealt with. program is trying to change the behavior of corporations, complicated n very ways often through indirect mechanisms. these exchanges through markets, et cetera. both interesting that maryland and oregon is a bit a lot ere, too, they did of planning, a lot of support and a lot of up-front work, very comprehensive, and it didn't work then either. kentucky, though, as julia has really doing a lot of this sort of rapid cycle

testing. a lot of hey did planning, too, julia. ut i wonder whether in some wa ways, given the fact that people how these entities, individuals, corporations, et react untilgoing to they actually go out and try --ngs, whether there kind of whether there calls for a public administration that is a bit little moreental, a increment incremental, monitoring what the short run and makes lots of adjustments. this really is a no-end implementations situation. that is a long comment from me. anybody can disagree or comment say that i'm smart. go ahead. >> well, i'm not quite sure what your question is, tom. >> a different kind of

implementation process. >> i think that it is a is a very - this large implementation problem. the question of getting oregones up and running, and maryland are good examples of where there were high failed.ions and they but so was the federal government. and i think the lesson is, implementing large systems change is very, very hard. it is not peculiar to government. there have been many failures in sector.ate and unless you are prepared for -- and maybe that was problem, that it wasn't -- unless you are prepared for failure and try gain and try again and test again and so forth you are likely to have a disaster, whether you are a big or oration or a state

whatever. the is is federalism in internet raage, social policy i age.nternet this is immensely complicated what these systems are supposed do. i was very impressed with what julia said about in kentucky made about nts she how they made it user friendly. hey didn't do the kinds of things that some federal exchanges and some state exchanges did. is a way to illustrate where we are going and keep point. this the director of the public health school at columbia and larry brown his colleague who used to be the director are already in the field. they have been to maryland and been to massachusetts, which is network. and we are on the ground looking work here hy did it and what did they learn from why there ed or didn't work and maybe what julia learned and

hat jocelyn learned the hard way. the point is that the kind of we are going to need to know, the way stuart said it, need to be known on the ground. itting in washington or in a cubicle at a think tank you can't get the richness of what i is demonstrated today is what we can add. we are not trying to say other are not important, but we think these studies add and already hat we are doing. we will talk about that in october. >> richard is absolutely right on that. need k, as you hinted, we to look at this as a process of experimentation. let's remember that in the helmalthcare of this country if the healthcare country ita separate

would be one in the world. when you look at the highly complex changes, one of the things we learned again one more time in this particular episode, often the case is you think it is going to work, it backfires. often places where you think it some place work, and will give you clues, and the process is try things and then to go back and say what are we doing, how can we then did the next phase/ hy when i made my remarks, there's an opportunity here, looking at the southern region, looking at the legislation, and the opportunities out there, and how few can look at the federal exchange for lake. we have within this the

capacity, the platform him to out different ways of the common objective of what the aca was there to do. a perfect example. it is my view the only way it can succeed in future. >> i will leave it to the audience for some questions. >> do we have any questions out in the audience? yes, right over here. i am an advocate for people in long-term care in the state of maryland and have been working in this field for about 12 years and interacting with the department of health and mental hygiene. i have a question and a comment. the district that of columbia and maryland share a common border, and a large

proportion of the employees of the federal government, offer-level employees, live in montgomery county, maryland. and this has had to have an effect on the people available from the state of maryland to work on a very complex i.t. project. you cannot have them do it both. and they were trying to do it at the same time, concurrently, and i just do not think maryland was getting the resources that it needed. but then my question to you, as just one out of my head -- i'm old, pardon me. the question is, to you think that is a possible cause of this? and the other piece of the ffer is i would o upper-level people are really not happy with what is going on with the programs. they probably will not tell you,

but they are telling me. they have been pushed to do more than -- nobody knows really what their job is. that is when government really did become unraveled, in my opinion. do you think it is possible that these two jurisdictions could have had a bad effect on the maryland exchange development? >> do you want to take a shot at that? >> i have not thought about that theory. when i look at the states where i think things went pretty badly, the three that come to are maryland, massachusetts, and oregon. they did not do well this year. the thing that stands out to me is you have been following this for a while, right up until the early care law passed, innovator grants for people who wanted to get ahead of the curve.

maryland, oregon, and nessus uses. the other states eventually pulled out of the grant programs. that is something about trying to do too much too quickly. tying the states that did not too well. they are the ones that are directly had the worst -- that is my unifying theory of what happened, but i'm sure in each state there is their own personal screwup in the middle of that. >> [indiscernible] >> hold it just a second. there were a lot of people that were not in the area working on the systems, so much of the work was not done by government employees. it was done by nongovernmental organizations, doing things that government has not done much of, which is like construct i.t.

systems. i think maryland and d.c. benefit rum the fact that there was -- benefited from the fact that there were so much talent in the area. good thing tos a think about, but i think they benefited from the beltway population, if you will. >> thank you. other questions? yes, back there. hi, from health management associates. as we are talking about the south, we have been talking about health insurance and the various mechanisms. when i think of the south, i think of highly concentrated markets and rather poor health outcomes. do you think as we go forward we are going to see a shift away from the discussion of exchanges and medicaid expansion and some

of the other programs and provisions within the affordable care act that focus on more community-level health are mentioned provisions that will prevention provisions that will get better outcomes? questioner is absolutely right to remind us that coverage in the exchanges were not the only thing in the affordable care act. resources andt of talent devoted to trying to figure out how to do health care theer and how to change wembursement systems so that have more effective incentives for improving health care.

yeah, i think that is going to the more into the fore, but subject today really was the exchanges and the coverage and how they are working out. while for theke a other parts of it to see the light of day, i think. >> i think the medicaid debate in the debate about improving health outcomes have become more entangled as you see states like indiana one to tether does two together. you have seen those things brought up together, and states are experimenting with how much of a waiver they can get an how they can work outcomes into what they are asking from the federal government. >> ok, any other questions? yes, please. and i think this will be our final questions, so thank you very much. i'm also from the national

campaign to prevent teen and unplanned pregnancy. i'm interested in the role of public opinion and whether the lookrch probleject will into that. will that continue into the cycle of more support which may contribute to further if limitation or expansion into something they have not already done, or are these things happening unrelated to each other in terms of policy, implementation, and public opinion? >> anybody want to tackle that? >> i think that is what you have been hearing. this is what we have been hearing today from that as experience is gained, as things are being talked about, and the newspapers are full of it, news coverage -- let me say at the national press club -- i am really impressed by how

newspaper reporters, walkable reporters, for many papers, are deeply knowledgeable about what and itening to this law, arehe fact that people getting ideas about it, and those ideas, as stewart put very did, too, areh, interacting with what may have in the future, and we got to keep our eye on that. we got to know that you have got to look at this on the ground and over time, and there are i you said thisnk complex -- there have been a lot of surprises, and that is not unusual, and this is really a big deal. >> ok. if we are to do a valuable research going forward, we have got to have good public

opinion data on a continuing basis to see, not only as he suggests, how public opinion influences what happens at the beginning, but how it changes pro and con and makes use of that information. >> all right. well, i think we should give a big hand to both panels. i think it has -- i want to thank all of our state researchers, as well as chris for doing the extra work with the overview report, and our second panel, which has been quite interesting, so let's thank all of them. [applause] now we are adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

special programming. native american history. a debate on scottish independence. sunday, robert katzman. two, in-depth with ron paul. burroughs., william he talks about his book. another chance to see that program. on american history television, friday, a nasa documentary. has an acceptance speech from the democratic convention. a look at election laws and legal precedent with bush versus

gore. think aboutwhat you the programs you are watching. call us. #or e-mail use the us. join the conversation and like us on facebook. >> on the next washington journal, a retired colonel discusses the threat of a basis. day,70 days until election a look at how the digital age is changing campaigns. washington journal's live every morning on c-span. you can join the conversation.

obama will speak to members of the legion at the convention in charlotte. >> c-span presents debates on what makes america great, evolution, and campus sexual assault. voting rights. find the schedule. call us or e-mail us. join the conversation and like us on facebook.

"washington journal" continues. to run foru want office you have to develop a message and do some polling. have to develop some campaign advertising. you can't do that until you raise money. this week we will talk about campaigns. we want to begin with fundraising 101. thank you both very much for being with us. let me put this in perspective. 1982, ran for office in the winner in a house race spent $600,000. a senate where spent $3.4 million. compare that to where we are 20 years later in 2012. if you ran for the house and

one, $1.6 million. the average senate winner spent in excess of $10 million. what does that tell you? guest: things are getting more expensive. that is just part of the issue. money, itook outside could be closer to $10 million for the house race. , tv you count outside money time is expensive. it is just competition. there are a lot more people trying to get more us is out there. host: let's talk about the super pac's and outside money. this is a new component. flooded the market with more people trying to get a message out. it brings in these new groups that are interested in particular niche