Calls for abolishing the premiums for the BC Medical Services Plan

    Case #3: Calls for abolishing the premiums for the BC Medical Services Plan BC is the only province that currently charges a health premium in an explicit way (i.e., not through the provincial tax system). For many years now, there have been calls for eliminating this premium. MSP premiums were increased for most British Columbians in the February 2016 provincial budget. In the February 2017 and the lead-up to the most recent provincial election, Finance Minister Mike de Jong announced that MSP premiums would be decreased starting in 2018. With the May 2017 provincial election leaving it unclear who would form a government, it is also unclear what will be happening with the MSP premiums in the future. At present, it looks like the provincial government will be formed by the BC NDP and the BC Greens parties, both of whom ran on platforms including changes to the MSP premium. To start you off on your research: (1) A newspaper article summarizing the February 2017 budget announcement about decreasing [the MSP premium: https://thetyee.ca/News/2017/02/21/BC-Pre-Election-Budget/ (2) A newspaper article summarizing the May 2017 NDP-Green agreement, including details of the MSP: http://www.abbynews.com/news/inside-the-ndp-green-governing-agreement/ (3) General information about the MSP: http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/health/health-drug-coverage/msp/bc-residents/premiums For your individual case analysis, you are to answer the following six questions. For questions 1 through 4, you must complete a table (see table format document on canvas). For questions 5 and 6, you are to write a prose (essay-type) response. Your answer to question 5 is to be no more than 300 words. Your answer to question 6 is to be no more than 600 words. 1. Identify at least 5 different ideas related to this particular case (another way to think about this is that some "ideas" can be conceptualized as sub-elements of the “What”s in the 5Ws/1H map so try using the 5 Ws/1H map for help [but know that not all "ideas" can be conceptualized in this way]) and specify why/how each of these ideas is related to the case. Things to consider including in the “why/how each of these ideas is related to the case” include who or what interest group is advancing this idea, is the idea contentious or well accepted, is the idea supported by research evidence or not, has the idea been in use for a long time or is relatively new, or is the idea a “zombie” idea. (See table format document for table to use in answering this question.) 2. Identify at least 5 different actors or interest groups related to the case (another way to think about this is the “Who”s in the 5Ws/IH map) and specify why/how each of these actors or interest groups is related to the case. Things to consider including in the “why/how each of these actors or interest groups is related to the case” include how and why this actor/interest group is involved in the case, what role the actor/interest group plays in the case, how the actor/interest group is a change-maker in this case, or how central the actor/interest group is to the case. Further specify the interest(s) or position(s) of each actor or interest group. Ensure that at least 3 different interests or positions are covered in your answer. (See table format document for table to use in answering this question.) 3. Identify at least 3 different institutions related to this particular case (another way to think of this is other “What”s in the 5Ws/1H map) and specify why/how each of these institutions is related to the case. Things to consider including in the “why/how each of these institutions is related to the case” include how and why this institution is involved in the case, what role the institution plays in the case (including how the institution may shape what is and is not included in the case), what is and is not debated in the case, or how central the institution is to the case. (See table format document for table to use in answering this question.) 4. Name at least 3 decisions that were made prior to this point that have led to how this case got to this point in time (another way to think about this is a combination of “What”s and “When” from the 5Ws/1H map, a further way to think about this is what decisions in the past created policy legacies). Briefly describe how each decision led to this point in time. (See table format document for table to use in answering this question.) 5. Review the ideas, interests, and institutions you have identified in your answers for questions 1 through 3. Which analytic category is most important to this particular case: ideas, interests or institutions? Or are two of the three most important? Or all three? Provide a rationale for your decision that talks specifically about this case. (Remember from the directions above that this answer is to be a prose answer and to be no more than 300 words. Any in-text references are included in the word count.) 6. Describe how this case is likely to unfold in the near future (i.e., the “prospects for the future” section of the “Why” in the 5Ws/1H map). In your answer to this question, you must provide at least 5 major claims about how this case is likely to unfold. Your answer must clearly identify your 5 major claims in brackets at the end of the appropriate sentence such as “(major claim 1).” Also provide the word count for this answer. (Remember from the directions above that this answer is to be a prose answer and to be no more than 600 words. Your bracketed identification of each major claim and any in-text references are included in the word count.) To develop your position about the likely future development in this case (question 6), you may find it helpful to consider the following: • What does using Roberts et al.’s control knob framework and its effects on performance goals have to say about this case? • What does using Pierson’s analytic frame of path dependence (as demonstrated in Hutchison et al., 2001) have to say about this case? • What ideas in this case and the topic of this case are contested ideas (i.e., have actors or interest groups arguing for various sides or interpretations of the same idea)? What are the relative strengths of the various actors or interest groups associated with these congested policy spaces? Your answer to question 6 does not need to explicitly use or make reference to any of these analytic considerations. You simply need to describe how you think this case is likely to unfold in the near future, not how you arrived at this analysis. But be aware that your assessment of the case is likely to unfold in the near future must be reasonable and credible to your reader (grader) given our class material and what you've already laid out in your case so it is in your best interest to use the analytic frames we use in class to develop your analysis. Researching your case: Each case has documents (e.g., newspaper articles, policy documents) to start you off on your analysis. You are expected to conduct additional independent research for your case analysis as well as use any relevant course material. We estimate that researching your case should take you no more than approximately 3 hours. (If you are taking more than 3 hours for research on your case, you should likely stop and ask for help from Laurie or one of the TAs.) You are not expected to know all there is to know about the case (as you might for an extended essay) but you are responsible for fleshing out the case so that you can provide strong answers to the questions in this assignment. You are also expected to find out (or confirm) the names of the key players in the case. For instance, if a newspaper article identifies the current Minister of Health of a province, you will want to confirm that that person is still the current Minister of Health of that province. To find the information you will need to answer these questions you will have to do some research online. Organizational websites, press releases, and newspaper articles are good places to start. The print media (mainly newspaper) may be particularly helpful for determining some key history components for some of these cases. You will likely not find much of help for this assignment in the academic research literature as each case is unfolding in real time and the academic literature will take time to catch up. Think about types of interest groups that might be involved in this topic. If you don’t know the names of possible interest groups, know that most types of health professionals have associations (e.g., the BC Nurses Union, the Canadian Medical Association) and some have colleges that are in charge of professional regulation (e.g., the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia). Many of these exist at both a provincial and national level. You are not to contact people working in the field related to your case for assistance. This course (and this assignment) does not have ethics approval for any human subjects interaction. You should be able to complete this assignment with information that is publicly available combined with what you have learned in class. Referencing: You are to provide two reference lists for your case analysis: (1) a “References Cited” reference list and (2) a “Works Consulted” reference list. The “References Cited” reference list: Provide in-text (even in-table) citations where relevant (e.g., when you have obtained an idea from another document, when you are using a direct quote). Any in-table or in-text referencing must also be listed on the “References Cited” reference list for the case. The “Works Consulted” reference list: Include a reference list of additional relevant sources you used in preparing your case analysis. “Additional relevant sources” are defined as sources not included in the “References Cited” reference list. It is expected that you will have consulted works that you did not end up explicitly citing. In other words, include a case-specific list of all of the websites and other sources you visited that assisted you in your learning for your case but that did not earn their way onto the “References Cited” reference list. Use the APA referencing style for any references. Be sure to review your reference list for accuracy and correct use of the APA format as points will be removed for mistakes in the references and use of the APA format.Note: You may want to change the orientation of your page for questions 1-4 to landscape to expand the space available to you in your table without a lot of line wrappingQuestion #1(Ideas)Idea Why/how related to case1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Question #2 (Interests – actors or interest groups)Actor or Interest Group Why/how related to case Interest/position of this actor/interest group1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Question #3 (Institutions)Institution Why/how related to case1. 2. 3. Question #4 (Decisions made before this point in time that led to how this case got to this point in time)Decision How did this decision lead to current state of case1. 2. 3.