Bill Overview
Title: Find It Early Act
Description: This bill requires health insurance plans (including public health insurance programs) to cover screenings and diagnostic imaging (with no cost sharing and no limit on frequency) for individuals who are at an increased risk of breast cancer.
Sponsors: Rep. DeLauro, Rosa L. [D-CT-3]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals at increased risk of breast cancer
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The bill targets individuals who are at an increased risk of breast cancer, which includes people with a family history of breast cancer, certain genetic markers, or other predisposing factors.
- Globally, breast cancer is the most common cancer, impacting approximately 2.3 million women each year.
- The primary beneficiaries would be women, although a small percentage of men at risk of breast cancer would also be affected.
- Risk factors such as age, obesity, and genetic predispositions can increase the number of individuals classified as high-risk.
Reasoning
- The policy mainly targets individuals at increased risk of breast cancer, estimated at around 20 million in the US, divided among various risk factors.
- The budget allows for substantial per capita spending mainly on screening and diagnostics, including advanced imaging and genetic testing for up to 20 million people.
- Some affected individuals may face multiple screenings per year due to their risk factors, increasing the policy's value to them.
- The population affected mostly comprises women above a certain age and those with hereditary risk factors, with some overweight individuals and even fewer men affected.
- Budget constraints imply prioritizing high-risk individuals for early intervention rather than broad universal policies.
- The wellbeing effects will be varied, with those who have had financial constraints and procedural barriers experiencing greater improvements.
- Commonness among the general population will be around 1 to 5 depending on inherent risk factors, with those not at risk having a score of 20.
Simulated Interviews
nurse (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial for people like me with a family history of breast cancer.
- Eliminating cost-sharing removes a significant burden from my family budget.
- I'm relieved I can now opt for regular screenings without worrying about costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
software engineer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to regular screenings at no cost gives me peace of mind.
- Knowing my risk level, I had been saving money specifically for screenings.
- This makes it economically feasible for me to have more frequent check-ups.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
retired teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy will likely encourage earlier detection, which is reassuring.
- As a retiree, even small costs can add up, so this policy saves me money.
- Regular diagnostics were previously a concern due to cost.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
finance analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The genetic marker put me at a constant unease despite healthy habits.
- With this policy, I feel more secure about my health screenings being affordable.
- Cost was previously a barrier to more frequent testing for me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
unemployed (Austin, TX)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate that the policy includes men as well.
- Previously, I wouldn't prioritize screenings due to cost.
- Regular diagnostics help me monitor any potential risk early without financial strain.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
high school teacher (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy ensures I am consistent with screenings.
- Even with regular screenings, the lack of cost means I can focus resources elsewhere.
- Peace of mind is invaluable when it comes to health.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
small business owner (Detroit, MI)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’ve been planning to undergo genetic testing, and this policy simplifies the decision.
- Frequent check-ups will be critical in my case and are now well within reach.
- This policy reduces financial anxiety about future health decisions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
software developer (Dallas, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Even if testing shows low risk, knowing more frequent checks won't be a burden is reassuring.
- I haven't yet experienced the ill effects others did but feel confident in my future screenings.
- The policy's removal of costs for diagnostics is a relief.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
marketing manager (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wouldn't be directly affected by the policy as I'm low-risk.
- The policy is important for those who are not as fortunate as I am.
- I'm hopeful this prevents suffering for many who need early screenings.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
project manager (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have been diligent with checks, this just ensures I can continue without issue.
- The covering of costs will allow me to stay on top of personal health challenges.
- Though I am proactive, the policy reinforces that I can access screenings more flexibly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000000 (Low: $10000000000, High: $20000000000)
Year 2: $15600000000 (Low: $10400000000, High: $20800000000)
Year 3: $16224000000 (Low: $10816000000, High: $21632000000)
Year 5: $17528320000 (Low: $11664640000, High: $23392000000)
Year 10: $20419521536 (Low: $13530816000, High: $27164608000)
Year 100: $75281497984 (Low: $49999872000, High: $100000000000)
Key Considerations
- The overall cost of the policy will depend significantly on the frequency of screenings, as there are no limitations set by the bill.
- Potential financial strain on public health insurance programs could require additional federal funding or budget reallocations.
- If successful, the bill could lead to long-term savings by avoiding late-stage breast cancer treatments.