Δαφνη Ευτυχια Αρθουρος

Just about all of a comment (everything but the first line) by osewalrus, 2007-12-18:

Bluntly, this is what sank Hilary Clinton's healthcare plan in '93. She and Ira Magaziner spent endless hours negotiating with the insurance industry and the drug industry to try to come up with a plan sufficiently palatable to get buy in. The result: a plan no one liked and the drug companies killed.

This is also why the tech companies get spanked on a regular basis. They are always looking to cut a deal with the intellectual property mafia. But the IP mafia never cut deals. And if they pretend to do so (such as the Digital Millenium Copyright Act), they will come back again and reopen them before the ink is dry.

Drug companies and others who profit off the current health care mess will fight tooth and nail against any change contrary to their interests. The formulation of public policy must take this into account, and must distinguish real problems of implementation and sustainability from industry posturing. As I often explain in my day job, I am not interested in solutions that won't work because they are a waste of time and do more harm than good. But I don't "negotiate" with broadcasters for use of the broadcast white spaces -- I fight them. I don't "bring everyone to the table" to address network neutrality -- I put out my vision, evidence and arguments and expect the industry to put out theirs.

The next President is going to have to fight against corporate interests to change the status quo. Of course the drug companies will have influence -- this is a democracy and the "right to petition government for redress of grievances" (lobbying) is guaranteed even to artificial persons by our Constitution. But if the next President goes in thinking s/he can "negotiate" with industry and "cut a deal" that has "broad stakeholder support," then s/he is either hopelessly naive or selling soothing syrup.