Suchergebnisse

This essay uses the case of the "medical evidence gap" to illustrate how polarization and party competition can undermine efforts to solve a societal problem. Policy experts associated with both parties agree that the lack of hard evidence about what treatments work best for patients with different conditions is a significant health care problem, and that greater investments in "comparative effectiveness research" (CER) would enable patients, providers, and payers to make more informed decisions. Until recently, CER was a technocratic, third-tier issue. Over the past year, however, CER became highly politicized because it got caught up in the partisan struggle over universal health care reform. The story of how CER morphed into a symbol of crude rationing schemes and government interference with the doctor-patient relationship offers a cautionary lesson about the limits of pragmatic governance in an era of polarization.

This essay uses the case of the 'medical evidence gap' to illustrate how polarization and party competition can undermine efforts to solve a societal problem. Policy experts associated with both parties agree that the lack of hard evidence about what treatments work best for patients with different conditions is a significant health care problem, and that greater investments in 'comparative effectiveness research' (CER) would enable patients, providers, and payers to make more informed decisions. Until recently, CER was a technocratic, third-tier issue. Over the past year, however, CER became highly politicized because it got caught up in the partisan struggle over universal health care reform. The story of how CER morphed into a symbol of crude rationing schemes and government interference with the doctor-patient relationship offers a cautionary lesson about the limits of pragmatic governance in an era of polarization. Adapted from the source document.

"Analyzes government's ability to "promote the general welfare" in the areas of health, transportation, housing, and education. Then examines two tools to improve policy design: information markets and laboratory experiments. Concludes by asking how Congress, the party system, and federalism affect government's ability to solve important social problems"--Provided by publisher

Frontmatter -- CONTENTS -- LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES -- PREFACE TO THE PAPERBACK EDITION -- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS -- UNHEALTHY POLITICS -- Introduction -- 1. The Medical Guesswork Problem -- 2. Sham Surgery -- 3. Doctor Knows Best -- 4. The Limits of Professional Self- Regulation -- 5. Zero-Credit Politics -- 6. Electoral Competition, Polarization, and the Breakdown of Elite- Led Social Learning -- Conclusion. -- APPENDIX TO CHAPTER 3 -- NOTES -- BIBLIOGRAPHY -- INDEX

How well can democratic decision making incorporate the knowledge and expertise generated by public policy analysts? This book examines the historical development of policy analysis, as well as its use in legislative and regulatory bodies and in the federal executive branch. The essays show that policy-analytic expertise effectively improves governmental services only when it complements democratic decision making. When successful, policy analysis fosters valuable new ideas, better use of evidence, and greater transparency in decision processes