As a public service, Cascade Policy Institute offers the following comparison between two approaches to the health care reform process.
Which process do you think best serves Oregon? Consider the alternatives, and then comment if you’d like about the pros and cons of the two approaches presented below.
Which health reform process do you prefer?
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting
different results.” “”Albert Einstein
Glorify ourselves Define the problem
Assure status quo to Medicare Insist on all-inclusiveness   and public employees
Process focused Performance focused
Appoint commissions, Request competing proposals
committees, focus groups
Negotiate and compromise Vet, compare and contrast
Talk big, act small Encourage innovation
Attack the “guilty parties” Reposition the interests and incentives
Create new bureaucracy Select “best” alternative(s)
Dependency / control Self-reliance / determination
Obscure accountability Test, evaluate, adjust
Tell people what they get Win customers with what they want
Perpetuate mediocrity Succeed or shut down
Change governors: Start over Move on to solving other problems
You can view, print and forward a formatted color version of this comparison here.
In January 2007 Cascade Policy Institute began a series of one-page Insights to address various health care reform issues. They’re published in BrainstormNW magazine and online in the Health Care Policy Insight section of Cascade’s Health Care research page. This comparison is the February 2008 Insight.
Steve Buckstein is Senior Policy Analyst and founder of Cascade Policy Institute, a Portland-based think tank.