If recent (and past) electoral history is any guide, this Presidential election, or at least the health reform part of it, is going to be fought with sound bites. We can already hear the right screeching about the ills of ‘socialized medicine’ while the left howls about the evils of privatized health care. The right trots out Canadians and Brits who allegedly suffered maltreatment (or no treatment) from the numb grey bureaucracy that is their ‘national health system’. The left counters with stories of under-insured Americans bankrupted by health care costs.
Conservatives decry waiting lists, progressives bemoan the US’ health care system’s lowly international ranking.
This is a hugely complicated issue. Pat answers and bumper-sticker slogans are meaningless and should be treated as such. Yet few of us have the time to really dig into the issues, to fully understand the WHO’s national health rating system or the reality of waiting lists in the OECD.
What’s a concerned citizen, one really trying to understand, to make informed decisions, to do?
First, when approached at a cocktail party, kid’s lacrosse game, or backyard barbecue by someone touting the latest statistic or quoting a health care horror story, just ask for the details. What is the source? Where did this happen? What caused it to happen? Who was involved? When did it occur?
I’m betting that in most cases the source will be vague (the internet…), location undefined, causality undetermined, and timing uncertain. So you’re left with an impression, albeit one based on a vague, unsubstantiated source, an impression apparently designed to give you, the listener, a negative perception.
Second, ask what the solution is. How could this be fixed? What could have been done better/faster/cheaper/smarter and what conditions need to exist to make that happen? What do you think would solve this? How would we pay for it?
Third, ask for definitions. What exactly do they mean by ‘socialized medicine’? Are providers government employees? Is this single payer? Are prices fixed? Is it universal coverage?
You don’t have to be an expert/wonk/policy geek, but you do have to be curious and willing to push back on folks spewing mindless sound bites.
People who just want to complain, criticize, and demonize those with differing views are not going to help solve this problem, rather they are miniature ‘Harry and Louise’ bomblets, programmed to go off at random intervals, triggered by a headline or patently false email. They spread fear and uncertainty, worry and hesitation. Their victims retreat into the status quo as the devil they know sounds a lot better than the garbage spouted by these Harrys and Louises.
That’s not to say we can’t have strong disagreements (as loyal readers have undoubtedly noticed, we like spirited fights around here). As long as they are fact-based, supported by solid data and the argument is logical, have at it.
But leave the fear-mongering and logic-twisting to the John Stossels and Ann Coulters.
Jun
11
