Messaging and Naming and Framing an Issue.  How one frames an issue is how one defines the problem.  Health care is not just about cost and access as we are seeing in the debate now, it is an extremely personal issue that touches numerous concerns.  That’s why fear is so effective in tearing reform apart.

I worked on a leadership team for three years with the Kettering Foundation in Dayton, Ohio.  Kettering is a research foundation that studies democratic practice. The organization is headed by David Matthews who was was the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under President Gerald Ford.  www.kettering.org

A critical issue in the success of addressing a problem is how it is framed.  See their overview publication: It is short and to the point. http://www.kettering.org/File%20Library/PDF/NamingandFramingIssues.pdf

In order to engage the public, it is critical to frame the problem in language that the people use to talk about the issue.  “If people don’t see their worries reflected back to them in their words, they back off.” “Security” and “insurance exchanges” are not the public’s words.  “Peace of mind” and “easy to understand affordable choices” would be, for example.

Everyone seems to have completely ignored the final report of the Citizens Health Care Working Group

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/chc/recommendations/execsumm.html

Ironically, despite the heavy scripting of the Working Group meetings, one issue emerged that was not on their agenda.  It was high enough on the list to be included in the final recommendations:  re-structure end of life care.

This issue was not in the original charge of the Task Force. Was not an issue in their working documents, but emerged voluntarily from the people at these meetings.

This work group was to have reported to Congress and the White House and was to have had a hearing. None was ever held.  It would be useful to go back to that report as we shape the present debate.

Cheers,

Kathleen