Greg Scandlen Takes on the Republicans
I am reading George W. Bush’s book, “Decision Points.” On page 46, he writes, “… I stood with Senators Pete Domenici and Ted Kennedy and signed a bill mandating that insurance companies cover treatment for people with mental illness.” Why did he do this? Because he once had a business partner, Rusty Rose, who had clinical depression. So, it didn’t matter a whit that signing this bill made coverage more expensive for working people, and increased the number of people who couldn’t afford to be covered at all. Good ol’ rich Rusty needed mental health services, so why not make those working stiffs pay for it?
More at Greg’s new blog.
I think Greg is right on. The Republicans need a kick in the rear end.
Good for Greg.
Greg has identified what might be called “the lost generation” of Republicans. They wasted 20 years!
It’s the nature of politics that most voters (and the most disinterested voters) are near the middle of the political spectrum. This is referred to as Median Voter Theory. In this theory, to win an election, a politician only needs 50% of voters +1. (The easiest way to do this is to pander to the median voter)
Another political theory posits that intensity of preference matters more than mass voters. This is because voters that are members of a special interest group are more engaged and can often out maneuver the disinterested masses who don’t necessarily support the interest group’s agenda (Interest Group Theory). Most politicians seem to follow a hybrid approach; rhetoric to appease the base of their party and actions that are closer to the median voter. That’s why Republicans talk tough on deficits yet vote for more government spending.
They deserve all of the criticism that can be dished out.
I wrote a pretty thorough (but concise) analysis of the law when Congress passed it (http://tinyurl.com/45k2b9t). Greg Scandlen’s criticism is well founded, IMHO. By mandating not only mental health coverage, but also that co-pays and deductibles be the same for mental as well as other medical care, the government inhibits innovation in this very complex area.
Mental health is the last type of medical care for which the government should force us to launder our payments through health insurers. A third-party payer simply cannot manage this liability.
Unfortunately this only works in a two-way race. In a three-way race, the bias is strongly against the center candidate. To illustrate, consider an electorate which is uniformly distributed across a one-dimensional policy space, 1st to 100th percentile, where voters choose the candidate closest to their own position.
For simplicity, position the three candidates at the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles. Voters in the 25th thru 37th percentiles will choose the candidate at percentile 25; voters in the 63rd thru 100 percentile will choose the candidate at 75; and voters between the 38th and 62nd percentiles will choose the centrist.
The result: the centrist comes in last, 37.5-25-37.5.
Even if you place the voters on a normal distribution, with all other factors the same, the centrists still loses by over 10 points. But it’s just as likely that the distribution is bimodal, in which case the centrist loses by more than the 12.5 margin of the flat model.
Runoff or “instant” runoff elections can’t help, since the centrist would have been excluded from the runoff round in the above example. But there are other methods that can help, the simplest being approval voting.