The current health care debate isn’t working because it is precisely that – a debate. Debates are about who’s right and who’s wrong, and they tend to further reinforce the entrenched positions of widely disparate views, making the discovery of common ground almost impossible. Advocates become riveted on taking control of the message so they can advance their own point of view, even if it means imposing their thinking on those who disagree. When one side is able to wrestle control and exert its will, there are always winners and losers. That’s because these verbal jousts often enable coercion by either the majority or the powerful. And in those instances where debates are able to bring together all sides, it’s usually because none of the parties could amass either the numbers or the power to get its way, so both sides are forced by circumstances to agree to a compromise that represents nothing more than a least common denominator solution.
It is often said that a good compromise is one in which everyone walks away unhappy, and when debate is the primary process for bringing closure to different opinions, that’s usually the best that anyone can hope for. The problem with debates is that they are fundamentally about getting control, and thus, are poor processes for creating the large consensus necessary for discovering the best or the most innovative solutions.
Although the vast majority of Americans agree that the current health care system needs fixing, Congress has been unable to bring real closure to this issue because we do not have an effective process for tapping into the collective knowledge resident in the diversity of opinions across the American people. Without such a process, it is impossible to create a meaningful consensus around an issue that deeply and personally touches everyone’s life.
Given the ingrained culture of debate, power, and control inside the Beltway, if we are to change the way we process wide differences on important national issues, the leadership may need to come from unusual places such as social networks or wiki pages creating a collective mosaic or from trusted private citizens sponsoring an innovative collaboration process to help us access our collective wisdom. If we want to create a future health care system that works for everyone, we have to give up the notion that we can control the debate. We have to learn to leverage our collective knowledge and discover our common ground.
Hey
Nice site very professional looking.
You might want to consider doing something very visual.
Your message will become known quickly if you do
Ex: wiki blog: with mutiple listing of what needs to change in health care from multiple individuals, with overall saying the group is smarter than any one individual. Show the consesus visually also with the voting dots.
Leave the debate to Washington visually focus them on the change that needs to occur that will get people interested.
Rod-
Excellent observation and excellent site. If, as a politician, I am only exposed to adversarial positions, I will eventually chose one or the other or a compromise – something less than an optimal solution.
More voices working collaboratively will generate something new and different.
Hopefully, we will generate the technology and the interest to make it happen.
Bob
Rod -
I like your blog, and I appreciate reading the post about the health care debate. I agree with you. Now if the executive and legislative branches could be influenced by your counsel.
Rick
Great post. Thanks!