Yes, it’s been a little quiet here lately (other than comments about 9/11 being an inside job, and who knows what kind of traffic mentioning that will bring?). The reasons are twofold: first, I have been building a new business I started early last year; and second, I just launched a blog that describes my thinking about that business. I’m very excited about both.
That said, PublicOrgTheory has been my first love for over five years, and I always come back to it. This meditation by Tyler Cowen on health care caught my attention this morning:
Over at Twitter, Matt Yglesias asks:
Do rightwingers really believe that US health insurance has no mortality-curbing impact?
I don’t speak for “right-wingers,” but I’ll say this:
1. I genuinely don’t know what to believe. And I often toy with the idea of an “innovation-maximizing” health care policy, so that future coverage is more effective.
2. I am commonly excoriated by people (not Matt) for not supporting government-subsidized universal health insurance, yet few if any of these people grapple seriously with the best evidence.
3. I live in a country where the extension of health insurance is a major issue, and a major budgetary issue, yet much of the discussion is in an evidence-free zone.
There’s more, but it was the evidence-based points that I found most compelling. While I think coverage for all Americans should make for a healthier nation, an economically stronger nation, and a nation better prepared for its own defense, I have to agree with Cowen that no one–including myself–is offering up evidence that would support the plans being discussed. There’s an opportunity to be seized here.
National debate seems to be one of the few areas left in American society–management and medicine being two notable others–in which evidence need not be the basis of an argument or action. “Proving it” is a big deal among people whose lives and livelihoods hang in the balance. It would be an excellent change to see that kind of urgency to “prove it” in all matters of national interest.