HomeNorthAmericaInsightsIn the Coming Health Policy Debate, Focus on “The Why”
Facebook icon
LinkedIn icon
Twitter icon

In the Coming Health Policy Debate, Focus on “The Why”September 10, 2021

By Patrick Brady

To maximize impact, stakeholders need to consider two approaches, one tactical and one stylistic, that when combined will form the basis of a winning public affairs campaign.

Facebook icon
LinkedIn icon
Twitter icon

By Patrick Brady

To maximize impact, stakeholders need to consider two approaches, one tactical and one stylistic, that when combined will form the basis of a winning public affairs campaign.

Facebook icon
LinkedIn icon
Twitter icon

Recently, Senate Democrats unveiled and passed a $3.5 trillion budget resolution that has the potential to enact the biggest change to health policy since the Affordable Care Act. Arguably, it may be even bigger. The proposed resolution seeks to expand Medicare with vision, dental and hearing coverage; close the Medicaid gap; maintain the Obamacare subsidies; make in-home care available to more people; and lower prescription drug prices.

These potential changes to health policy come at a crucial moment, as the healthcare system continues to respond to the resurgent pandemic while struggling with the concurrent challenges of adopting value-based care to control costs and improve outcomes, assimilating new technologies, addressing social determinants of health and expanding access. What’s more, these changes are falling on the shoulders of clinicians suffering record levels of burnout, many of whom are contemplating leaving the profession.

Taken alone, these proposals will generate a massive public affairs response from the health sector. However, the budget blueprint also promises to invest in family leave and education, address climate issues and fund additional infrastructure projects. With the combined issues bringing countless interest groups to the effort, as well as competing voices from both the left and right, we may see the most fiercely contested policy environment in a generation. Consequently, organizations seeking to influence the health policy debate will need to be prepared to engage in ways that will help distinguish their voice from the countless others in D.C.’s cacophonous echo chamber. To maximize impact, stakeholders need to consider two approaches, one tactical and one stylistic, that when combined will form the basis of a winning public affairs campaign.

The Tactical Approach

The tactical approach is obvious: It’s the integration of approaches using lobbying, communications and grassroots. The coming policy arguments around health will be won as much in legislators’ home districts, in their hometown media channels and on their social platforms as they will in Washington. Ultimately, all healthcare is organized and delivered locally. Combining local voices and tactics with strong D.C. lobbying and national communications support will be crucial in this fight. The D.C market will be crowded with competing messages; the winners will work locally as much as nationally.

The Stylistic Approach

The second approach to maximize impact is to re-frame a needed policy change in terms of “why” instead of “what.” Adopting Simon Sinek’s approach of “Starting with Why” in healthcare is nothing new — brand and product communicators have been doing it for a decade. Any of the 55.8 million people who have watched Sinek’s TED Talk understand the power of why, but the strength of this approach is how much it will resonate with policymakers.

Elected officials want to solve big problems, they want to talk in aspirational and inspirational terms, and they want to believe in principles greater than themselves. The “why” framing delivers on these needs and gives Members of Congress the chance to speak more in generalities without committing to the specifics of policy implementation. This is important because it is the details that can trip up elected officials in selling an idea, provide an opening for an opponent to discredit their proposal or come back to haunt them in the future if a policy is implemented differently than an elected official anticipated.

Given elected officials’ other responsibilities in this massive policy debate, the nuances of health policy may be too intricate and complicated for many to grasp unless they are on a relevant subcommittee. Talking about the “why,” sharing constituent stories and quoting influential media stories provides the “air cover” that Members of Congress need to vote for or against something.

That is not to say stakeholders should ignore deep policy explanations, economic analyses or the research to define an argument. These will always be part of a successful public affairs campaign. But to help capture wider elected official attention, it is vital to engage the public and help the media frame an engaging story. Stakeholders would be well advised to integrate messages and tactics around the “why” of their issue.

Pat Brady is an EVP with BCW’s Public Affairs and Crisis team and has more than 20 years of working with leading healthcare companies, trade associations and medical societies.