• The best health policy reporting is in the blogosphere

    Health reform has taught me many things. One of them is that the best reporting of health policy and politics is in the blogosphere, not from traditional media sources. Today’s post by Harold Pollack is an exemplar. First he quotes today’s Wall Street Journal editorial,

    You can do a lot with 59 Senate votes, and that was certainly clear this week as Majority Leader Harry Reid and his fellow Democrats slammed the door on a bipartisan attempt to repeal ObamaCare’s new 1099 reporting requirement on small business.

    Then Pollack tells us what the WSJ really should have at least mentioned!

    The Nelson Democratic bill would have exempted purchases of less than $5,000 (and firms employing less than 25 people) from the 1099 requirement. It would have addressed the legitimate issues small business people raised. It got 56 votes. It failed because Republicans had the forty votes required blocked it. […]

    Here is the real kicker. The Wall Street Journal‘s editor never mentions the Nelson bill at all. The dishonesty is rather astonishing, even from them.

    It isn’t and shouldn’t be Harold Pollack’s job to perform this service. But, I’m sure glad he does. It should be the Wall Street Journal’s job to deliver the news without omitting, well, the news. I guess they don’t see it that way. So, why read it?

    • Yes, I think that is especially been true about health reform debating, but the give and take that results in the policy compromises seems to be left out of most of the mainstream reporting. I am reminded about the long battles over SCHIP in the Bush administration time. Every twist and turn of that (like the deals over comparative effectiveness support) which was very important to the votes being taken were completely glossed over by all the mainstream media. You hint that the WSJ did this intentionally. Perhaps, but I think part of it is the freedom the bloggers have (without editors) to charge forward and print. The tradeoff is perhaps they also might be wrong more of the time, perhaps.