Stone Age Politics in the Health Care Reform Debate

Fans of the TV serial House, will notice that every time Dr. House diagnoses a problem he scrawls on a white board. In scientific terms, he creates a decision table.

When approaching any decision, we try to estimate the chances of reaching certain intended outcomes. Then we weigh them against our abilities and the costs of achieving them. In parallel, we try to estimate the costs and risks of unintended consequences. Even a simple decision, with a few variables, can quickly become a complex problem. Just by putting possible options and potential outcomes in writing, and -- practically -- drafting a basic decision table, we make it easier to comprehend. Wikipedia says it best:

"decision tables are a precise yet compact way to model complicated logic."

Barely anyone questions the need for health care reform; however, reaching a consensus on how to do it seems unobtainable. The debate turned into name-calling and shoving one's agenda, focusing not on merit but on the loudness of the crowds at town hall meetings. Obviously, it is impractical to draw decision tables when writing a text to HP, when commenting on the internet, or when sending an email. However, one might expect that each voice would bring some arguments for or against the proposed reform, hence addressing one or more aspects of the decision table that every one of us drafts in our imagination.

At least this is what I thought in my naiveté. In reality, very few incurable optimists like me do it. My email address is on the mass mailing list at Organizing for America; therefore, every few days I receive an email related to health care reform. Some are signed by President Obama, some by his staffers. None of these emails has ever addressed any merit of the proposed reform. They are full of lofty talk about historical mission, about mean opponents spreading lies, and about the need for action. None of these emails explains how the proposed reform would resolve any of our problems. They did not provide me with any information intended to fill up my decision table. Nothing in their emails even indicated that they ever made any decision table when drafting their health care reform proposal.

Most vocal opponents of the health care reform proposal are not any better. It is about name-calling, it is about "death panels", and it is about socialism. Decision tables are nowhere to be seen. In the country proud to be founded on reason, the major debate of our times is guided by feelings and emotions. In a country claiming world leadership in science, the scientific approach is absent in the most important debate about our future.

Talking about health care with almost everybody I can, I have encountered someone working at Rockwell Automation. They claim that their Arena simulation software could be used for simulations of possible scenarios of different variants of the health care reform, as it is already widely used by the health care industry. I do not feel competent to verify this claim, but even if it is untrue, I bet that there are experts and simulation software out there that could do it.

Computers have been in commercial use for over half of a century. Among other things, they can easily compute, much faster than we could, the possible consequences of our decisions. Let me ask everybody: why do we not have simulations of the different options of the health care reform run back and forth in the public view, so we all could better comprehend what we are getting into? Why were not simulations run before the current health reform proposal was presented for approval? Why did not the opponents of this reform run these simulations? Why did not they arrive with simulations of alternative health reform proposals? If, in my business, I was faced with a decision of putting $1.3 trillion of my money at stake, I would allocate some time and money to run simulations giving me some insight into the possible risks and benefits of different options. Oops, as a taxpayer, is it not my money? Is it not my country? Is it not my right to see the results of these simulations, before giving my OK to any health care proposal?

When I read speculation about how the Gang of Six might affect the fate of heath care reform, I had to pinch myself to verify the world I live in. It is a world where society makes pivotal political decisions based on arms wrenching in the narrow circle of powerful. It is a world where mobs are called to action and brought to the public square to shout whatever they were told to yell. It is a world where a decision table is an invention thousands of years away from being discovered. It is a world without universities. It is a world where most people cannot conduct even a basic logical deduction. It is a world where Microsoft and Google are galactic distances away. It is a world where fears, prejudices, and other emotions dominate over reason. This is a Stone Age society in action. In this way, Americans decide the future of the health care in this country.

Comments

[Philclock]

You miss the point; people are frustrated because the health care debate is not about what they can buy, but WHAT"S RATIONED TO THEM FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES AND BIG GOVERNMENT! People want to buy health care IN THE OPEN MARKET, not a market controlled by insurance companies and government. EVERY PLAN BEING OFFERED IS CONTROLLED BY INSURANCE COMPANIES OR THE GOVERNMENT MONOPOLY. People are smart and know if that happens, health care will be rationed and prices will be through the roof, as it is with any monopoly.

Obama and the Democrats' love for Big Government is freaking everybody out, me included. No wonder I'm seeing people at town hall meetings I would never imagine; the working man and woman, the people on the verge of retirement, the retirees, appearing on their own volition and at their own expense, wanting Big Government out of the way so we can all go back to business. Until that happens, I hope EVERYBODY is vocal!

[gailcolorado]

Thank you for the perfect answer to governing - decision tables. Our elected officials should learn to do this on a regular basis and it would bring logic and reasoning to our country. I applaud you!

[aofh]

While I can understand President Obama's desire to get something done, I see your point. I suppose that we're a kind of society that doesn't cotton to thinking. Action action action. Makes living here kind of scary. You never know when the paramilitarist will start showing up at peoples doors and carrying them away.

[Ann Bedingham]

A fair, balanced, and progressive wellness/healthcare system won't be attained until the profit is taken out of the equation.

[Henryk A. Kowalczyk - Huffpost Blogger]

Why? Are people providing health care different than all of us?

[tigerlily46514]

New " GOVT ASSISTED SUICIDE" will be part of new health care plan if it is passed, says Congressman Mark Souder, R, Indiana

Monday, Aug 31st, Middlebury Indiana.
Tonight Congressman Mark Souder, (R) for 3rd district,at town hall on healthcare reform.
I stood up and asked Cong. Souder the following question:

"The fear campaigns are rampant, but i don't like seeing our seniors this afraid. I am a nurse and have witnessed 'living wills' many times, and a person CAN check the "Do EVerything" box for their choice. I want to know if you have the courage to stand apart from your party and tell these seniors here tonight there are no death panels."

SOUDER then said, THREE TIMES or more, that there would be GOVT ASSISTED SUICIDES if the health care plan was passed!!
I did squeal, "NO THERE ISN'T!! IS A LIE!" but the mike was pulled away...

GOVT ASSITED SUICIDES!!???
i have not heard THAT ONE before, have you???

I've heard the 'death panel" and the "pull the plug on gramma" propaganda, but GOVT ASSISTED SUICIDE? is NEW LOW!!
All three of the stations in South Bend Ind, WSBT, WNDU, and WSJV, all FILMED this, but chose not to air that comment by souder. In the paper, they cut and paste his long answer to modify gist of it.

I'VE REC'D AN EMAIL FROM REPORTER WHICH SAYS he DID leave out the suicide remarks.

[TRex86]

Thank you for challenging this ethically and cognitively challenged Representative. I appreciate your following up on your local media. Excluding those statements is either cowardice on the part of the media or collusion. It doesn't take a computer simulation to prove that Rep. Souder is a lying, despicable demogogue.

[WendyInCA]

Thanks for sharing this. I went to Congressman Souder's website and wrote him an email in which I told him what I thought about his sorry display of irresponsibility and dishonesty in whipping up fear to further his agenda - Feel free to do the same, HuffPost readers!!
http://souder.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm

[research]

No one agrees on the modeling of the economy, since the plutocrats created their own intellectually dishonest Economics, to counter FDR's success.

[EbonBear]

With respect, the healthcare debate isn't even about feelings and emotions. It is about lies. It's a great deal easier to tell a lie than to debunk one and the right have decided that facts are entirely optional (aided and abetted by their corporate media pets, naturally). You can win every debate when you don't have to stick to the facts.

[Henryk A. Kowalczyk - Huffpost Blogger]

Please notice that you contradict yourself. One can win a debate by not sticking to facts only if people accept lies because they fit their unsubstantiated beliefs, prejudices, or emotions. Lies are eternal, but the soil they fall on is not always as fertile as here and now. This is the problem.