Mercy! Mercy! That Dang Nabed PERCY!

Defining the Healthcare Issue in Terms of a Solution

Science uses REASON almost exclusively in its work. With this tool they have brought us out of the darkness and into a more real understanding of the world around us. As individuals and citizens we would benefit from using the REASON process in our daily lives. However, despite knowing better, we often deal with our problems by adopting the first course of action that comes to mind. If we would only pause, take time to define a problem, review the facts and assumptions, come up with some possible options, assess them, compare them with each other and choose an optimal solution, our lives would be much richer than going off half cocked with the first impulse that springs to mind.

A government is somewhere between the impulsiveness of individual citizens and the single-minded focus of the scientists. The current administration is the worst practitioner of REASON in the history of American Politics. Why this has happened is because "The Potty Mouths" already have all the answers and as a consequence, reason is not a big player of their scheme of things.

I could fill pages with examples but for discussion purposes will focus on the Unaffordable Healthcare Act. When the Obama Administration came into office they defined the health care issue in terms of a pet solution. This was Universal Healthcare. Nobody paused, stroked their chin and asked the logical first step question in the reasoning process. For those who have forgotten, the first question is asking, “What’s the Problem?” The answer is used to define the solution window. If they had, it would have been clear from the onset that Obama Care was not the optimal answer. Instead they “Shot from the Hip,” and came up with something unaffordable and legislation that does more harm than good. A year from now tax paying Americans will look back and see that health care insurance has doubled and there are more uninsured Americans than when the current regime took power. Since the President now realizes he's in way over his head, and the label “Amateur” is becoming more and more self-evident, he has asked, “If anyone has a better idea I want to hear it.” It’s a little late after six years in office however, there certainly is a better way and that would be to apply a little reason from the outset.

“What is the problem that never got defined,” begs the rhetorical question? The problem is, determining how to provide a safety net of healthcare to uninsured citizens. We already have programs to do that in Medicare and Medicaid. In addition, anyone in need of life threatening care can always get it by waking into any Emergency Room. “Well,” counter the Liberals in exasperation… “There has to be a better solution than this.” Yes, I suppose there is if the problem had been so defined in the beginning as “… determining the best way to provide health care for uninsured voters.”

However, what happens when you begin with a preconceived solution before examining the full range of possibilities… is that the outcome becomes “Pie in the Sky” legislation, written by a host of special interests who have jumped on the bandwagon. The result is inevitably a gold plated alternative that’s never going to fly and in this case threatens to destroy our current system, one that is arguably, the greatest on the planet. Do we really want to turn that into a string of third world outpatient clinics? The Unaffordable Health Care act can only work by watering it down, like what they have in Canada and Europe. This will include RATIONING (a euphemism for DEATH PANELS) and an ever-decreasing range of options and choices. If ever there was an example of a cure being worse than a disease it is Obama Care. This ill-conceived attempt at legislation needs to be repealed and a new administration needs to start over, looking for something that won’t destroy America’s current healthcare system in the process.

If the problem had been defined as “Determining the best way to provide a safety net, for uninsured citizens,” a much different and sensible alterative could have emerged. The optimal solution isn’t a universal Cadillac Policy for everyone. The unintended consequence is that rather than a 95% solution for everyone we’ll wind up with a Socialist plan that is far worse than what we had to begin with.

Tomorrow I’ll discuss the second step in the process that was omitted. This was identifying the FACTS and Assumptions bearing on the problem. This is the second phase in the process and like the first, it was totally overlooked.