Role of Actuaries in the Health Reform Debate

[BurnTheMidnightOil]

I have been closely following the health reform discussions in the media and noticed the conspicuous absence of actuaries in any sort of policy discussions. Granted, actuaries are not policy makers, but I believe that they can certainly bring in the quantitative flavor for these discussions that could make the debating process more "understandable" and "solid". Wonder why actuaries are not part of the process!

[DudeMan]

Actuaries are behind the scenes people.

[ms244]

Originally Posted by BurnTheMidnightOil

I have been closely following the health reform discussions in the media and noticed the conspicuous absence of actuaries in any sort of policy discussions. Granted, actuaries are not policy makers, but I believe that they can certainly bring in the quantitative flavor for these discussions that could make the debating process more "understandable" and "solid". Wonder why actuaries are not part of the process!

I believe AHIP is playing a prominent role. Do they not bring any actuarial representation?

[Random Walk]

The American Academy of Actuaries is definitely part of the process. It has conducted briefings on Capitol Hill for Congressional staff, and also has produced several short papers describing actuarial issues around health reform.

This is somewhat "behind the scenes", but it gets important technical information to those who will be writing the laws.

I haven't watched the web broadcast of the Capitol Hill briefing, but I glanced through the short papers -- they seem to be designed to educate (like explaining what "actuarial equivalence" means, or the issues around an individual insurance mandate), rather than advocating a particular policy.

See http://www.actuary.org/ for details.

[Heathen]

Originally Posted by BurnTheMidnightOil

I have been closely following the health reform discussions in the media and noticed the conspicuous absence of actuaries in any sort of policy discussions. Granted, actuaries are not policy makers, but I believe that they can certainly bring in the quantitative flavor for these discussions that could make the debating process more "understandable" and "solid". Wonder why actuaries are not part of the process!

Actuaries have said a lot. However, most people don't want to listen. If you notice the discussion only pays lips service to controling the cost of health care, but the actual political discussion is health care financing, i.e. who pays.

[MarsLasar]

Originally Posted by BurnTheMidnightOil

I have been closely following the health reform discussions in the media and noticed the conspicuous absence of actuaries in any sort of policy discussions. Granted, actuaries are not policy makers, but I believe that they can certainly bring in the quantitative flavor for these discussions that could make the debating process more "understandable" and "solid". Wonder why actuaries are not part of the process!

http://www.soa.org/library/essays/he...-2009-toc.aspx

That link is good for starters. It's not too likely that health actuaries at the policy discussion level hang out on the AO. Maybe Brad. But he's retired.

[tenthring]

When they aren't underestimating new medicare programs for the Bush admin?

Anyway, do we really think "facts" are going to be the major determinant in this process.