Mental Health Spending

Question A: Increasing state spending on mental health services, research, and job development will provide net social benefits greater than net social costs.

Question B: Increasing state spending on mental health services, research, and job development will reduce poverty/inequality in Ohio.

Question C: Increasing state spending on mental health services, research, and job development will increase employment in Ohio.

Question A: Increasing state spending on mental health services, research, and job development will provide net social benefits greater than net social costs.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	5	This question is too complicated to be able to answer with any certainty. These are three different programs and each one would require a separate cost-benefit analysis to answer the question, each of which would be quite complex in itself. It is hard to know, ex ante, if a program will work. For example, the DARE program was popular and seemed like a good idea, but research shows that it was a complete failure for decades. On the other hand, many early childhood education programs are extremely cost effective, but lack funding because policy makers don't perceive them to have value.
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Agree	8
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Strongly Agree	10	One of the most efficient uses of tax dollars; investing in people and helping to create equal opportunity.
Hasan Faruq	Xavier University	Strongly Agree	10
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Strongly Agree	10	We really do underfund mental health services. Almost everyone knows someone who would benefit from increased availability of services in the community.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Agree	8	The devil is in the details, but generally mental health care seems to be underfunded in the US.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Strongly Agree	9
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	5
Fadhel Kaboub	Denison University	Strongly Agree	10
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Uncertain	8
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Strongly Agree	9
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Agree	8	Net social benefits would be social benefits minus social costs - I'm just pointing this out in case you publish this widely, to avoid nit-picking.
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Agree	9	The details matter (money doesn't solve anything by itself) but the evidence is clear that mental health and substance abuse issues have negative individuals, households and society. Additionally, existing support systems are strained and underfunded. So well-directed money would likely have high net returns.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Strongly Disagree	9
Kay E Strong	Independent	Strongly Agree	10
Albert Sumell	Youngstown State University	Strongly Agree	10	Economic research unequivocally show spending on mental health services, research, and job development is a good investment with positive social returns.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Strongly Agree	8
Andy Welki	John Carroll University	Agree	7
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Strongly Agree	10

Question B: Increasing state spending on mental health services, research, and job development will reduce poverty/inequality in Ohio.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	3	It seems probable, but as mentioned above, it can be hard to know in advance.
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Uncertain	8
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Strongly Agree	10	Yes, support is not available evenly to all citizens. This will help address that.
Hasan Faruq	Xavier University	Agree	10
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Agree	9	The evidence I have seen and gathered shows that services do result in increased employment for consumers and hence higher incomes for many lower income consumers.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Strongly Agree	8	Access to mental health care is currently much easier for the well-off. Expanded access would surely benefit those on lower incomes, along with providing additional service-sector employment.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Agree	8	The effect on poverty and inequality will depend on the implementation of the programs and accessibility to people who would actually need those services.
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	5
Fadhel Kaboub	Denison University	Strongly Agree	10
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Disagree	7
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Strongly Agree	8
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Agree	8
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Agree	8	Mental health and substance abuse issues affect labor market participation and therefore affect poverty and inequality. Addressing these issues would help decrease poverty and reduce inequality.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Uncertain	8
Kay E Strong	Independent	Strongly Agree	10
Albert Sumell	Youngstown State University	Strongly Agree	10	This is why spending on mental health services, research, and job development is a good investment with positive social returns - it reduces poverty and unemployment.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	7
Andy Welki	John Carroll University	Agree	6
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Strongly Agree	10

Question C: Increasing state spending on mental health services, research, and job development will increase employment in Ohio.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	4	It is unlikely to have a measurable effect on employment, but if mental health services cure problems so that patients can enter the workforce then that will increase labor force participation. And if job development services allow faster matching of employers it will reduce frictional unemployment. The main reason for spending on health (including mental health) is to reduce suffering and increase flourishing and so it is odd to worry about the effect upon employment which is minor.
Bizuayehu Bedane	Marietta College	Agree	8
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Strongly Agree	10	Yes, I think it will marginally increase employment and moreover increase the productivity of the workers already employed if they know they can get support.
Hasan Faruq	Xavier University	Agree	10
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Agree	9	The devil is in the details and it would be good if DeWine's proposals were fleshed out.
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Agree	6	On balance, probably so, but I think this one's a little tricky. Traditionally many mental health care services have been provided outside of formal employment (through volunteers, family, friends, social groups/clubs/churches, etc.). I think it's likely increased funding will push more of this to the formal employment sector, so measured employment will probably increase.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Agree	7
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	5	I don't have enough knowledge of the mental-health care system to know if current government funding is being efficiently allocated.
Fadhel Kaboub	Denison University	Strongly Agree	10
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Disagree	7
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Strongly Agree	9
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Agree	8
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Agree	8	Mental health and Mental health and substance abuse issues affect labor market participation. Addressing them would help to increase labor market participation and (presumably) employment.
Lewis Sage	Baldwin Wallace University	Agree	9
Kay E Strong	Independent	Strongly Agree	10
Albert Sumell	Youngstown State University	Strongly Agree	10	This is why spending on mental health services, research, and job development is a good investment with positive social returns - it reduces poverty and unemployment.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	8
Andy Welki	John Carroll University	Agree	6
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Agree	8