Every attempt to change or replace an existing program, set of by-laws, or other guidelines for operation, some person or group decides that some process needs to be either initiated or changed. There is seldom, if ever, a group of people assembling to decide what is needed or what needs to be changed.
Now, in the case of Health-care reform, if blank sheet means that nothing has been written down by when those responsible for writing the rules or guidelines, I can understand that. But that would not mean that participants would not have ideas written down in their minds or on their own pieces of paper.
So let's suppose there is a blank sheet of paper on which the eventual plan is to be written, how would the discussion begin? With the chairman asking if anybody has an idea about what needs to be done or how the group should proceed?
Suppose someone suggest that the first item to be discussed in formulating a health-care bill would be those to be covered by the bill. One party likely would support one level of coverage, and the other party another level, especially if party member have previously discussed the matter among themselves. Would such prior discussions be appropriate. One would expect that some prior thought would have been given to ideas before they are recommended for consideration. Otherwise, how would a committee member be prepared to justify the recommendation.
It makes sense, therefore, that each member would come to the committee meeting with ideas and their implementations written down in their heads or on paper. It would help if these ideas were not previously discussed with other party members. Members would them feel less inclined to support ideas simply because the committee member is a member of his or her party.
But that is where the problem lies.
No comments:
Post a Comment