| By Superduperficial - Sep 25th, 2007 at 5:38 pm EDT |
I have no idea. So, help educate me please? :)
A post over at the right-wing blog RedState claims that the actual number of unwillingly uninsured Americans is much lower. The post doesn't include actual links to sources, so I have the suspicion this guy is fudging the numbers, just like he accuses the Democrats of doing.
So I figured I'd kick it to you guys -- moving beyond the "47 million" soundbite number...
...what's the real number? How do we figure out what that number is?
And what about the problem of people being underinsured? Last I checked, most people who go bankrupt for health-cost reasons *had* health insurance.
How can we better argue the progressive case for health care reform -- or even more fundamentally, the case that there's a problem to be resolved here -- and what statistics should we be using?
Another statistic I often hear mentioned is our rate of infant mortality -- but then, I've heard the counter-argument that our infant mortality rates are only high because we're advanced enough that we attempt to save long-shot chances that wouldn't even make it to term under other health-care systems.
And, oddly enough given the public debate, rates of satisfaction with our health care system among the general population are actually quite high compared to other nations.
In short - any health-care policy wonks here, who want to sort out these competing and contradictory claims for me?
!
Comments are closed for this post.
The problem of underinsurance is also hard to quantify, since there will be differing opinions about whether a person is covered for "essential" treatment based on differing ideas of what treatment is or is not "essential."
I think the way to handle the argument for this issue is to hold the quantitative aspect in reserve and make the main argument a qualitative one. We should educate people about Harry and Louise and their fight with the insurance company to cover Harry's angioplasty. It's tough to win a back-and-forth over statistics, and it's just as tough to get the average American to listen to a statistical argument, especially about life and death issues. So we make our pitch on an emotional level: this is a broken system, and it could easily fail you even if you have insurace. YOU, the average man on the street, are at risk, just like [insert examples A, B and C].
But frankly, if you're making a statistical argument and the figures from the US freakin' Census aren't enough to convince whomever your pitching, they probably aren't persuadable on the issue. Those are the guys you gotta beat, not the ones you gotta convert.