Straight Platform Politics

The Four-Party Health Care System – Part 1

An article in the Summer 2009 issue of The Independent Review examined our nation’s four-party health care system. Charles Kroncke and Ronald F. White are the authors of “The Modern Health Care Maze: Development and Effects of the Four-Party System”.

The article states, “Our national health care system is so dauntingly complex that reform efforts seem hopelessly adrift.” The authors feel that reform efforts should begin with looking at health care stakeholders. The obvious ones are: first-party patients, second-party health care providers, third-party payers (private insurance companies and public governmental programs), and fourth-party employers providing health care insurance for their employees (who will become first-party patients).

Other stakeholders involved in our nation’s health care system include: scientists and researchers, research labs, colleges and universities, lawyers, law firms, unions, and professional societies. And we cannot forget all of us who “invest in mutual funds that hold stock in the health care sector.”

The authors point out that the fact that the “health care industry accounts for at least 14% of the gross domestic product (GDP),” illustrates just how complex our health care system is. It goes way beyond the doctor-patient relationship.

“In the United States, politics—that is, each stakeholder group’s capacity to influence powerful legislators—drives health care reform.” Health care has so many stakeholders that true and lasting reform seems out of reach.

Charles Kroncke, Ronald F. White, The Independent Review, The Modern Health Care Maze, doctor-patient relationship, first-party patients, four-party health care system, four-party payment system, fourth-party employers, gross domestic product, health care reform, health care stakeholders, second-party providers, third-party payers

Prekindergarten: The New Cure For Social Ills–Part 2

The pre-k movement: will we ever learn?

Psychologists investigated the wild claims of the self-esteem movement and found, to their dismay, that these claims were just that – claims – and nothing more. Their investigation uncovered several disadvantages of high self-esteem, but by then a generation had paid the price for this foolishness. See Part 1

Now we have more absurd claims from the pre-k movement. Are we going to be foolish again or are we going to learn from our mistakes? Are we going to ignore the negative effects of prekindergarten until another generation pays the price?

Any academic improvement from pre-k has been shown to dissipate by the end of the first grade. But the pre-k classroom misbehavior and aggression, which has been well documented, persists longer than any boost in academic performance.

If the wild claims of the pre-k movement are true, those states (like Georgia and Oklahoma) that have had pre-k systems in place for over 10 years should show a solidly positive academic effect. However, they don’t. In fact one such state was the worst performer in terms of fourth-grade reading tests.

Pre-k advocates continue to cite a pre-k project that is at least 40 years old. The Perry Preschool Project had only 58 children in the experiment group and all were considered intellectually challenged. The parents were required to be actively involved with the pre-k program and with the home visitation component of the project. This was not a typical pre-k program and any positive result cannot be expected, and has not been duplicated, in state-run prekindergarten systems.

Some economists may tout pre-k as an important component of economic development, but that is only because they want more mothers of young children to stay in or to enter the workforce. Pre-k is childcare and state-run pre-k is free (not for the tax-payers) childcare. It’s all about what is good for business; it is not about what is good for the child.

Perry Preschool Project, academic improvement, academic performance, academic skills, academics, achievement, aggression, childcare, cigarette use, claims, crime, criticism, depression, economic benefits, economic development, economic investment, economists, first grade, gross domestic product, investment return, job performance, misbehavior, mothers, negative effects, pre-k, pregnancy, prekindergarten, productive workforce, psychologists, reality, relational skills, self-esteem, self-esteem movement, sex, drugs, alcohol, social benefits, social ills, taxpayers, unreal, violence, welfare, wild claims, workforce, young children

Pre-Kindergarten: The New Cure For Social Ills–Part 1

The pre-k movement: will we ever learn?

Psychologists finally took the time to study the wild claims of the self-esteem movement and found, to their dismay, that these claims were just that – claims. High self-esteem in children did not cause them to have better academic performance, better job performance, less sexual activity, less drug or alcohol use, less aggressive or violent behavior, or better relationships.

People with high self-esteem were found to actually have poorer academic and job achievement, to experiment with sex, drugs, and alcohol at earlier ages, to be more aggressive and violent, and to have poorer relational skills. They were also prone to depression due to their inability to handle criticism in a constructive manner.

So now we have pre-k advocates making similar wild claims: unlimited social and economic benefits. Participating in high quality (a fall-back qualifier) pre-kindergarten will cause children to be more likely to graduate from high school, enroll in college, earn more, stay employed, and be healthier. They will be less likely to become pregnant, engage in criminal and sexual activity, pursue drug, alcohol, and cigarette use, and rely on welfare.

Pre-k is also touted to be a vital and sound component of economic development. It supposedly   is a sound investment producing a sizeable return (7-16% depending on who is making the baseless claim) on every dollar spent. Pre-k has been linked to a more productive workforce and a 3.5% increase in gross domestic product.

Wow! Even high self-esteem couldn’t top that. But where is the reputable research to support all these wild claims? It took psychologists over 20 years before they seriously investigated the claims of the self-esteem movement. And by then we had a generation negatively impacted by the real results of inflating self-esteem. See: The Self-Esteem Movement Part 3 and See: The Self-Esteem Movement Part 4  

Is it going to take us 20 years before we understand the folly of the wild claims of the pre-k movement? 

academic skills, academics, achievement, aggression, cigarette use, claims, commom sense, crime, criticism, depression, economic benefits, economic development, economic investment, gross domestic product, investment return, job performance, pre-k, pregnancy, prekindergarten, productive workforce, psychologists, reality, relational skills, self-esteem, self-esteem movement, sex, drugs, alcohol, social benefits, social ills, unreal, violence, welfare, wild claims