US Infant Mortality and the President's Party (Rodriguez, Bound, Geronimus, 2013)

[swag]

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2350275

Abstract:

Background: Infant mortality rates in the US exceed those in all other developed countries and in many less developed countries, suggesting political factors may contribute.

Methods: Annual time series on overall, white and black infant mortality rates in the US were analyzed over the 1965-2010 time period to ascertain whether infant mortality rates varied across presidential administrations. Data were de-trended using cubic splines and analyzed using both graphical and time series regression methods.

Results: Across all nine presidential administrations, infant mortality rates were below trend when the President was a Democrat and above trend when the President was a Republican. This was true for overall, neonatal, and postneonatal mortality, with effects larger for postneonatal compared to neonatal mortality rates. Regression estimates show that, relative to trend, Republican administrations were characterized by infant mortality rates that were, on average, three percent higher than Democratic administrations. In proportional terms, effect size is similar for US whites and blacks. US black rates are more than twice as high as white, implying substantially larger absolute effects for blacks.

Conclusions: We found a robust, quantitatively important association between net of trend US infant mortality rates and the party affiliation of the president. There may be overlooked ways by which macro-dynamics of policy impact micro-dynamics of physiology, suggesting the political system is a component of the underlying mechanism generating health inequality in the United States.

[Rozlee]

1. That's no surprise. The advent of Medicaid dropped infant mortality over 40% within a decade

of its inception. Progressive policies in the 20th century saved the lives of millions of women and children. The Children Bureau served millions, but was put out of commission by physicians that were resentful of the intrusion of midwives into what they considered their professional territory. But, progressive programs like Medicaid revolutionized health care for poor and minority women and children. I couldn't bring up the article from the CDC, but Google "Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999, Healthier Mothers and Babies."

[Igel]

2. "There may be overlooked."

The "may" is the funny bit. It allows for the mere party affiliation itself, without any other factor, being the cause.

On the other hand, it's not a very fine-grained analysis, if this report is true. It looks at things in 4-year chunks with binary "above" or "below" averaging. Then again, most press reports like this bare scant resemblance to the paper.

Then again, it is a quickie post-doc paper by a recent PhD on the job market, with co-authors by his mentors. First actual journal article. Probably a one-year gig and he's showing off a bunch of neat statistical tools he's just acquired. Wonder if the lead author's diss is in preparation for publishing.