Start by reading and following these instructions: Quickly skim the questions or assignment below and the assignment rubric to help you focus.Read the required chapter(s) of the textbook and any addit

Copyright © 2020 by Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC, an Ascend Learning Company Substantial discounts on bulk quantities of Jones & Bartlett Learning publications are available to corporations, professional associations, and other qualified organizations. For details and specific discount information, contact the special sales department at Jones & Bartlett Learning via the above contact information or send an email to [email protected].

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication DataNames: Nickitas, Donna M., editor. | Middaugh, Donna J., editor. | Feeg, Veronica D., editor.Title: Policy and politics for nurses and other health professionals : advocacy and action / [edited] by Donna M. Nickitas, Donna J. Middaugh, and Veronica D. Feeg.Description: Third edition. | Burlington, Massachusetts : Jones & Bartlett Learning, [2019]Identifiers: LCCN 2018028645 | ISBN 9781284140392 (paperback)Subjects: | MESH: Health Policy | Policy Making | Lobbying | Health Care Costs | United StatesClassification: LCC RA395.A3 | NLM WA 540 AA1 | DDC 362.10973--dc23LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018028645 6048 Printed in the United States of America22 21 20 19 18 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 VP, Product Management: David D. CellaDirector of Product Management: Amanda MartinProduct Manager: Rebecca StephensonProduct Assistant: Christina FreitasProduction Editor: Kelly SylvesterSenior Marketing Manager: Jennifer ScherzayProduct Fulfillment Manager: Wendy KilbornComposition: S4Carlisle Publishing Services Cover Design: Kristin E. ParkerText Design: Kristin E. ParkerRights & Media Specialist: John RuskMedia Development Editor: Shannon SheehanCover Image (Title Page, Part Opener, Chapter Opener): © Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock Printing and Binding: McNaughton & GunnCover Printing: McNaughton & Gunn All rights reserved. No part of the material protected by this copyright may be reproduced or utilized in any form, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner.

The content, statements, views, and opinions herein are the sole expression of the respective authors and not that of Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement or recommendation by Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC and such reference shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes. All trademarks displayed are the trademarks of the parties noted herein. Policy and Politics for Nurses and Other Health Professionals: Advocacy and Action, Third Edition is an independent publication and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by the owners of the trademarks or service marks referenced in this product.

There may be images in this book that feature models; these models do not necessarily endorse, represent, or participate in the activities represented in the images. Any screenshots in this product are for educational and instructive purposes only. Any individuals and scenarios featured in the case studies throughout this product may be real or fictitious, but are used for instructional purposes only.

The authors, editor, and publisher have made every effort to provide accurate information. However, they are not responsible for errors, omissions, or for any outcomes related to the use of the contents of this book and take no responsibility for the use of the products and procedures described. Treatments and side effects described in this book may not be applicable to all people; likewise, some people may require a dose or experience a side effect that is not described herein. Drugs and medical devices are discussed that may have limited availability controlled by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use only in a research study or clinical trial. Research, clinical practice, and government regulations often change the accepted standard in this field. When consideration is being given to use of any drug in the clinical setting, the health care provider or reader is responsible for determining FDA status of the drug, reading the package insert, and reviewing prescribing information for the most up-to-date recommendations on dose, precautions, and contraindications, and determining the appropriate usage for the product. This is especially important in the case of drugs that are new or seldom used.

Production Credits Acknowledgments ix Preface xi Contributors xiii SECTION 1 Introduction 1 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Chapter 3 A Policy Toolkit for Healthcare Providers and Activists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\ 43 SECTION 2 Population Health 6 3 Chapter 4 Population Health Care: Access, Cost, and Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\ . 65 Chapter 5 Global Health: A Vision for Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Chapter 6 Mental and Behavioral Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5 SECTION 3 Affordable Care Act: From Enactment to Sustainability 13 5 Chapter 7 Affordable Care Act (ACA) Reframed and Uncertain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ . 13 7 Chapter 8 Healthcare Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5 Brief Contents iii Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock SECTION 4 Health Financing: Payers, Markets, and Models 18 5 Chapter 9 Healthcare Costs: Follow the Money . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7 Chapter 10 Private Health Insurance Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 7 Chapter 11 Medicare: Protector to Innovator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 1 Chapter 12 Medicaid and the Financing of Care for Vulnerable Populations: A Story of Misconceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 5 Chapter 13 Innovation for the Delivery System of the Future: Medical Homes, Accountable Care Organizations, and Bundled Payment Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 SECTION 5 Health Care and Provider and Care Delivery 2 89 Chapter 14 Hospitals: Consolidation and Compression . . . . . . . . . 29 1 Chapter 15 Enhanced Primary Care Roles for Nurses and Other Professionals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 3 Chapter 16 Physicians: It Is Increasingly about the Team . . . . . . . 341 Chapter 17 Health Information Technology and the Intersection of Health Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371 Chapter 18 Political Power of Nurses: Harnessing Our Values and Voices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 3 iv Brief Contents Contents Acknowledgments � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ix Preface � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � xi Contributors � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � xiii SECTION 1 Introduction 1 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 3 Nurses as Advocates � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 4 Advocacy and Public Health Nursing � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 6 History and Political Advocacy � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 9 Nursing Strong � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 11 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 13 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 25 Introduction � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 26 Policy Defined: A Framework for Government Action � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 26 The Policy-Making Process � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 31 What Is at Stake for Nurses and Other Health Professionals? � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 37 Chapter 3 A Policy Toolkit for Healthcare Providers and Activists � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 43 Introduction � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 44 Stakeholder Power � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 46 Expertise � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 48 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 51 Toolkit Case Studies � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 52 SECTION 2 Population Health 6 3 Chapter 4 Population Health Care: Access, Cost, and Quality � � � � � 65 Lessons from Nursing History on Vulnerability, Disparities, and Political Advocacy � � � � � � � � � � � � � 66 The Face of Vulnerability Today � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 69 Vulnerability and Disparities from a Population-Based Perspective � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 73 Political Advocacy toward Health Equity � � � � � � � � � 77 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 81 Chapter 5 Global Health: A Vision for Action � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 87 The Politics of Global Health in the United States of America � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 89 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 98 Chapter 6 Mental and Behavioral Health � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 10 5 Introduction to Mental and Behavioral Health � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 106 Federal Government and Presidential Efforts to Improve the Nation’s Mental Health � � � � � � � 107 State-Related Mental Health Policies � � � � � � � � � � � � 109 City and Community-Directed Mental Health Care Efforts � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 110 Policies Encouraging Consumer-Directed Mental Health and Behavioral Health Services ( The Recovery Movement) � � � � � � � � � � 111 Challenges in the Provision of Mental Health and Behavioral Health Services � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 112 Groups Requiring Additional Political Protection � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 112 v Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock Lower Socioeconomic Status–Related Mental Health Policies � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 113 Veterans’ Use of Mental Health Services and Policy Issues � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 114 Policy Innovations to Improve Mental Healthcare Outcomes � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 115 Ongoing Challenges: A Look to the Future of Policy Making in Mental Health and Behavioral Health � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 116 Summary � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 118 SECTION 3 Affordable Care Act:

From Enactment to Sustainability 13 5 Chapter 7 Affordable Care Act (ACA) Reframed and Uncertain � � � � 13 7 Health Reform in the United States: Recent and Past History � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 138 Overview of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 145 Financing Health Reform � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 149 Quality Improvement and Prevention Initiatives � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 150 Constitutionality � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 150 States and Health Reform � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 152 Key Issues Going Forward � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 153 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 157 Chapter 8 Healthcare Quality � � � � � � � � � 16 5 Quality Care and Public Policy � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 166 Human Error � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 167 Patient-Centered Care � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 171 Error Measurement Tools � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 172 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality � � � � 172 Patient Safety Indicators � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 173 National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 173 National Error-Reduction Efforts � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 174 Public Quality Reporting Systems � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 176 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services � � � � � � � 177 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 178 SECTION 4 Health Financing: Payers, Markets, and Models 185 Chapter 9 Healthcare Costs: Follow the Money � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 18 7 Health Care Is Different � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 188 Resource Allocation and Market Role � � � � � � � � � � � 189 Cost —The Main Problem � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 193 Health Policy—ACA and Beyond � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 198 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 200 Chapter 10 Private Health Insurance Market � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 20 7 History of U �S� Health Insurance Reform � � � � � � � � � 208 Health Insurance Plans � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 209 Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance � � � � � � � � � � 214 Health Insurance Exchange Marketplace � � � � � � � � 215 Laws and Regulations Impacting the Provision of Health Insurance � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 215 The Health Reform Changes Impacting Private Insurers � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 216 ACA and Its Impact on Employers � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 216 Private Insurance Industry Response to ACA � � � � 218 Health Insurance Legislative Changes on the Horizon � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 219 Opportunities for Nursing � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 219 Quality Patient Care and Care Coordination Strategies � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 220 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 222 Chapter 11 Medicare: Protector to Innovator � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 23 1 Introduction � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 232 Evolution of the Passage of Medicare: Timeline and Milestones � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 233 Current Medicare Structure � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 236 Overview of Medicare Spending � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 241 How We Pay for Medicare � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 241 Medicare Quality Improvement Organizations � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 242 vi Contents The Future Outlook: The Way Forward � � � � � � � � � � � 243 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 247 Chapter 12 Medicaid and the Financing of Care for Vulnerable Populations: A Story of Misconceptions � � � � � � � � � � � 25 5 Introduction � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 256 Health Outcomes in the United States in Relation to 10 Developed Nations � � � � � � � � � � � � 257 Populations Served by Original Medicaid � � � � � � � 259 Original Medicaid Is Different Program in 50 States and Washington, DC � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 260 Traditional Medicaid Costs and Variation by State � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 261 ACA Medicaid � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 265 Who Is Left Out � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 266 Health Insurance and the Health of Vulnerable People � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 267 Chapter 13 Innovation for the Delivery System of the Future: Medical Homes, Accountable Care Organizations, and Bundled Payment Initiatives � � � � � � � 279 Introduction � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 280 The Innovation Center: Promoting Care Delivery Models for the Future � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 280 Rationale for New Models � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 281 The Four Major Healthcare Service Delivery Models � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 281 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 286 SECTION 5 Health Care and Provider and Care Delivery 2 89 Chapter 14 Hospitals: Consolidation and Compression � � � � � � � � � � 29 1 Hospitals’ Role within the Delivery System � � � � � � 292 Hospitals in a Historic Context � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 292 Baseline Information � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 294 Challenges Facing the Community Hospitals � � � � 298 Hospital Strategies in a Competitive Market � � � � � 301 The ACA and The Rationalization of Hospital Care � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 303 Healthcare Policy, Health Reform, and the Role of Hospitals � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 306 Chapter 15 Enhanced Primary Care Roles for Nurses and Other Professionals � � � � � � � � � � � � � 31 3 Why Primary Care? The Case for Change � � � � � � � � 315 Overtreatment, Overuse, Waste, and Healthcare Harm � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 315 Support for Value-Based Care as a Bipartisan Approach � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 317 How Payment Reform Shapes Needs and Opportunities in Primary Care � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 318 What Skills Do Nurses Need in These Advanced Primary Care Settings? � � � � � � � � � � � � � 324 Nursing Education � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 329 Mental Health � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 331 Dental Care � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 331 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 332 Chapter 16 Physicians: It Is Increasingly about the Team � � � � � � � � � � � 341 Medical Professionalism � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 342 Physician Supply: Who Are the Doctors? � � � � � � � � 343 How Are Physicians Practices Organized and Reimbursed? � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 348 Physician Accountability � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 353 Medical Errors, Physician Practice, and the Barriers to Quality Care � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 356 Overcoming the Barriers to Quality Care � � � � � � � � 356 Conclusion: Choices and Interests � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 358 Chapter 17 Health Information Technology and the Intersection of Health Policy � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 371 Introduction � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 372 Federal Origin and Influence in Development of HIT � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 373 Contents vii Nursing and Health Information Technology � � � � 378 Nursing Terminology and the Data of Nursing Care � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 380 A National Action Plan: The Macro Perspective on HIT � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 381 Nursing and the Electronic Health Record: The Micro Perspective on HIT � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 382 Health IT: The Intersection of Data Security and Health Policy � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 383 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 391 Chapter 18 Political Power of Nurses:

Harnessing Our Values and Voices � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 40 3 Origins of the Nursing Profession � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 405 Nursing Definitions: Past and Present � � � � � � � � � � � 406 Nurses and Policy � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 407 The Nursing Workforce � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 413 Transforming the Care Delivery System � � � � � � � � � 415 Pathways to Nursing as a Career Choice � � � � � � � � � 416 Specialization and the Evolution of Nursing Roles � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 419 Current State of the Profession � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 419 Enhanced Nurse Licensure Compact � � � � � � � � � � � � 421 21st-Century Nursing: Evolving Roles for Nurses � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 421 Policy as a Tool to Influence Nursing Professionalism and Nursing � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 425 Conclusion � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 427 Legislative Resources � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 427 Federal Agency Sites � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 428 Other Related Sites � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 429 Index ��������������������������������������� 449 viii Contents Acknowledgments It is with sincere appreciation and gratitude that we would like to acknowledge the many individ - uals, including family, friends, professional col - leagues, and students, who have made this third edition possible. Special thanks go to those pro - fessional nurses who have gone before us pav - ing the way by being stewards of the discipline, advocates, and activists in promoting nursing, public health, and policy. As the editors, we are profoundly grateful to continue in their foot - steps, fulfilling our promise to safeguard the health of society and ensuring that future gen - erations of nurses recognize how health and public policy are instrumental to their educa - tion and practice. To my co-editors, Donna J. Middaugh and Veronica D. Feeg , your enduring friendship, men - torship, and insight have made this book possi - ble. With your profound trust and unwavering commitment, this third edition is offered in the ongoing quest to ensure all nurses harness the power within and bring their voices and values to the bedside, boardroom, classroom, and halls of Congress to promote policies that educate and inform the public about what nursing is, not just what nurses do. We also would like to acknowledge the superior oversight and dedication of Tricia Plummer, our team administrator, who help coordinate all the essential activities that made this third edition such a seamless success. Tri - cia, your professional skills and support were greatly appreciated. To my husband, Michael, whose love, pres - ence, and encouragement has allowed me to fulfill my professional hopes and dreams. Thank you for making this such an exciting journey and always believing all things are possible. To my children, Nick, Lili, Kate, Luke, and JP, your joy and love have fueled my energy and enthusiasm to live my life by the words of Mahatma Gandhi:

“Keep your values positive because your values become your destiny.” Always be positive and be an example so that others may follow. — Donna M. Nickitas To my husband Robert and our son Rob - ert Guy, who have awakened my soul and are my inspiration in everything I do. They have taught me to love unconditionally, enjoy life, live with purpose, take risks, and strive for ex - cellence. Robert Guy: You have become such a compassionate, dedicated nurse! We are so proud of you! Also, to the memory of my mother, Alpha Duff, a teacher, who taught me to never stop learning. — Donna J. Middaugh To my husband Alan, you are my rock and my enabler. You have always given me space to do what makes me happy and wings to make me soar into new endeavors without fear of failing.

You make the days easy for me to be produc - tive in my own way. You give me understanding when I’m unraveled; you give me comfort when I need it most; you give me love in all you do. To my daughter, Kelly, you are my sun and the light of my life. You have become my teacher and my sage with your wise guidance and words ix Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock of wisdom. You provide me with creative in - spiration in my work by modeling it in yours. To my mother, Mary, and in memory of my dad, Americo “Red” DeCarolis, you both nur - tured my passion for learning and supported me unconditionally and financially throughout my years in college. You may not have finished high school but you always valued the impor - tance of education. — Veronica D. Feeg x Acknowledgments Preface Sally S. Cohen Why this book? Why now? Nurses and other health professionals have many textbooks on health policy to choose from. Donna M. Nickitas , Donna J. Middaugh , and Veronica D. Feeg’s third edition of Policy and Politics for Nurses and Other Health Professionals has distinct features that make it a wise investment for faculty, students, and others seeking concise, expert, and useful information on how to understand and influ - ence health policy. First, the editors have carefully chosen the most salient issues on government agendas and not overwhelmed readers with the plethora of all possible health policy issues around us. This is critical in order to make health policy mean - ingful to and within reach of students and cli - nicians who can be quickly overwhelmed by the world of health policy. Second, this edition’s addition of case stud - ies is of tremendous benefit. Based on decades of teaching health policy at all levels of nurs - ing education and to interdisciplinary and in - terprofessional groups of students and faculty, I am convinced that policy case studies are es - sential. They offer faculty options for innovative assignments and discussions that encourage stu - dents to write or speak about health policy in a nonjudgmental context. The case studies, which are strategically placed within the chapters, of - fer real-life scenarios. These scenarios typically have more than one possible solution to a policy problem. Case studies also: (a) facilitate discus - sions about policy problems, (b) teach students to articulate significant themes in health policy, (c) require synthesis of valid evidence, and (d) demonstrate the importance of political analy - ses. The editors have wisely included more than one case study in some chapters to demonstrate how one policy can be applied to many differ - ent situations or issues. The third advantage of this text is that the editors have a well-honed vision of what health professionals need to know in an era of con - tinually shifting public policy sands. Nickitas, Middaugh, and Feeg’s third edition is based on the premise that health professionals need to be as nimble in government arenas as they are in clinical settings. Moreover, they recognize that this entails linking local, national, and global health issues because of their inherent inter - connectedness. With media and technology enabling rapid dissemination of information, the editors have provided content and case studies that encourage effective communication using online resources. Some of these issues primarily apply to individuals and populations with access to the In- ternet and other technologies. Nurses and other healthcare providers recognize that vast parts of the world lack such resources. People in such locales are struggling to find clean water, erad - icate severe hunger, and prevent common and new infectious diseases. Moreover, the geopolit - ical terrain has become increasingly complex as war, terrorism, and natural disasters strike across the globe. The realities of climate change and en - vironmental health risks make the sweeping dif - ferences in allocation of resources between the “haves” and “have nots” an ever-present challenge for health professionals. These global challenges are in contrast to other public health issues, in - cluding the proliferation of noncommunicable xi Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock conditions such as obesity, cardiac illness, and mental health and behavioral problems (espe - cially substance abuse and addictions). Nickitas, Middaugh, and Feeg wisely ad - dress the diversity of these issues by including chapters on global and population health as in - tegral to the text—and not as “add-ons” at the end. By addressing poverty and other socioeco - nomic causes of health problems, they acknow - ledge the importance of health policy beyond the doors of the clinic or hospital. Similarly, they frame the chapter on physi - cians as an issue of interprofessional teamwork, instead of trying to present physicians or any other professional as separate components of the healthcare delivery system. By emphasizing the importance of team care, they have minimized the risk of readers engaging in the familiar and useless “physician–nurse” games. Will this text endure forever? No health policy text can meet that challenge. However, given the complexity of health policy and the significant problems of teaching it to nurses and health professionals, this third edition of Policy and Politics for Nurses and Other Health Profes - sionals can facilitate teaching and learning across diverse settings and student populations. In the health policy and education arenas, which can be characterized by considerable disagreement and little consensus as players vie for scarce re - sources, this text is a winner and one that can bring players together as they find common ground in addressing the global and local issues on which people’s lives and well-being depend. xii Preface Contributors Nancy Aries, PhD Professor of Social Policy School of Public Affairs Director of Baruch Honors Programs Baruch College The City University of New York New York, New York Steven Baumann, PhD, APRN-BC, RN Professor Hunter College Hunter-Bellevue School of Nursing New York, New York Claudia J� Beverley, PhD, RN, FAAN Professor (Secondary), Department of Health Policy and Management Professor College of Nursing Professor (Secondary) College of Medicine Director, Arkansas Aging Initiative, Donald W. Reynolds Institute on Aging University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Little Rock, Arkansas Linda Bradley , MSN, MPH, PHCNS-BC Assistant Professor New York City College of Technology Brooklyn, New York Pennie Sessler Branden , PhD, CNM, RN, CNE Barbara Caress Senior Consultant Service Employees International Union New York, New York Ellen Chesler Senior Fellow Roosevelt Institute New York, New York Barbara Cohen, PhD, RN Professor of Health Services School of Health Studies Berkeley College New York, New York Wesley Cook , DNP(c), APRN, FNP-BC, CPSN Nurse Practitioner Washington, DC Brigitte Cypress, EdD, RN, CCRN Associate Professor East Stroudsburg University Department of Nursing East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania Patricia Eckardt , PhD, RN Molloy College Rockville Centre, New York Veronica D � Feeg , PhD, RN, FAAN Associate Dean and Director PhD Program in Nursing Molloy College The Barbara H. Hagan School of Nursing Rockville Centre, New York Stephanie Ferguson, PhD, RN, FAAN, FNAP Consulting Associate Professor Stanford University Stanford, California Founder, President, and Chief Executive Officer Stephanie L. Ferguson Associates, LLC Amherst, Virginia xiii Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock Shirley Girouard , PhD, RN, FAAN Professor and Associate Dean College of Nursing SUNY Downstate Medical Center Brooklyn, New York Valerie Gruhn Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières Joyce Hahn, PhD, RN, APRN-CNS, NEA-BC, FNAP Associate Professor School of Nursing George Washington University Washington, DC Christine Hancock Director C3 Collaborating for Health London, United Kingdom Lauran Hardin , MSN, RN-BC, CNL Senior Director Cross-Continuum Transformation National Center for Complex Health and Social Needs Camden Coalition of Healthcare Providers Camden, New Jersey Olga S� Kagan , PhD, RN Eileen Levy, RN, PhP Nurse Practitioner at NSLIJ Huntington Hospital Huntington, New York Sandra B� Lewenson, EdD, RN, FAAN Professor College of Health Professions Lienhard School of Nursing Pace University Pleasantville, New York Jennifer E � Mannino Donna Middaugh, PhD, RN Clinical Associate Professor Associate Dean for Academic Programs Coordinator, Nursing Administration Masters Specialty College of Nursing University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Little Rock, Arkansas Geraldine Moore , EdD, RN Molloy College Rockville Centre, New York Lois Moylan , PhD, RN Molloy College Rockville Centre, New York Donna M� Nickitas, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, CNE, FAAP, FAAN Dean and Professor Rutgers University School of Nursing Camden , New Jersey Editor, Nursing Economic$, The Journal for Health Care Leaders Pitman, New Jersey Betty Rambur, PhD, RN, FAAN Routhier Endowed Chair for Practice Professor of Nursing University of Rhode Island Kingston, Rhode Island Roby Roberston, PhD Professor Emeritus School of Public Affairs University of Arkansas – Little Rock Little Rock, Arkansas Yael Rosenstock Director of Programming Center for Ethnic, Racial , and Religious Understanding CUNY New York, New York Nancy Rudner, APRN Professor of Nursing George Washington University Washington, DC xiv Contributors Janice A� Selekman , DNSc, RN, NCSN, FNASN Professor School of Nursing University of Delaware Newark, Delaware Brenda Helen Sheingold, PhD, MBA, BSN, FNAP Assistant Professor Director Health Care Quality Graduate Programs George Washington University Washington, DC Lisa Sundean , PhD, RN Assistant Professor Department of Nursing University of Massachusetts , Boston Boston, Massachusetts Joel Teitelbaum, LLM Associate Professor Department of Health Policy and Management Milken Institute School of Public Health George Washington University Washington, DC Anh Phuong Tran , BSN, RN-BC, ONC Adult Health Nurse Practitioner New York, New York Marie Truglio-Londrigan, PhD, RN Professor College of Health Professions Lienhard School of Nursing Pace University Pleasantville, New York Ralph Vogel, PhD, RN Clinical Assistant Professor College of Nursing University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Little Rock, Arkansas Helen Werner, PhD, RN Assistant Professor Program Coordinator, Upper Division Monroe College School of Nursing Monroe, New York Sara Wilensky, PhD Faculty Milken Institute School of Public Health George Washington University Washington, DC Contributors xv 1 © Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock SECTION 1 Introduction CHAPTER 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action CHAPTER 2 Policy and Politics Explained CHAPTER 3 A Policy Toolkit for Healthcare Providers and Activists © Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action Sandra B. Lewenson and Donna M. Nickitas OVERVIEW The American Nurses Association (ANA) reminds nurses of the social contract between nurses and the public that “reflects the profession’s long-standing core values and ethics, which provide grounding for health care in society” (American Nurses Association [ANA], 2010, p. 10). The ANA Social Policy Statement has articulated nursing’s social obligation since it was first published in 1980. Nurses turn to this document to understand how nursing fulfills this obligation by providing ethical and culturally competent care to individuals, families, communities, and populations. It also helps nurses explain their role in the larger society, to new members of the profession, and to nurses already working in the field. New position statements about inclusivity and diversity by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) (2017) and the American Academy of Nursing (AAN) (2016) contribute to a sense of responsibility nurses share to fulfill the social obligation to society. The AACN (2017) states that “to have equitable systems, all people should be treated fairly, unhampered by artificial barriers, stereotypes or prejudices” (p. 173). It continues to address unconscious and conscious bias of which we as nurses must be aware to make a change. Advocacy includes, and if not, should include, the notion of inclusivity and diversity. This chapter explores political advocacy in light of nursing’s role and responsibility to advocate for and act on behalf of those for whom nurses have contracted to provide care. The first section of the chapter explains why nurses need to know history to be effective advocates and why knowing history matters to advocacy. It provides historical exemplars to highlight how history informs the profession as it continues to invoke the social contract that nursing maintains with society. The second part of the chapter examines a more contemporary look at nursing’s political advocacy efforts and what it means for nurses, the profession, and the health of the public at large. 3 CHAPTER 1 OBJECTIVES ■ Discuss why nursing history is relevant to health policy and nursing advocacy and action. ■ Explore historical exemplars that provide evidence of nursing’s ability to advocate for individuals, families, communities, and populations. ■ Analyze nursing’s role in how political advocacy impacts nurses, the profession, and the health of the public at large. ▸ Nurses as Advocates Although society reportedly trusts nurses to work toward accomplishing the goals set forth for them by the profession (ANA, 2010), nurses may not be grounded in how they reached these “long-standing core values” that the nursing pro - fession developed over time. As nurses advocate for their patients—whether seen as individu - als, families, communities, or populations— an understanding of nursing’s enduring and long-standing values that are rooted in its his - tory provide depth and breadth to their efforts.

To this end, it is important to know nursing’s historical role in ensuring access to care; it is important to know nursing’s contributions to - ward patient quality and safety measures; it is important to know how nursing interventions changed over time in response to the context in which nurses practiced; and it is important to know how nurses and the profession adapted to shifts in the social, political, economic, and cultural environment (D’Antonio & Lewenson, 2011). Fairman (2017) writes that “our past shapes everything we do, whether we explicitly acknowledge it or not” (p. xi).

Why Study Nursing History?

Historian and nurse educator Ellen Baer and col - leagues respond to the question of why nursing history should be studied: Just as a nurse can make little progress caring for or curing a patient’s presenting problem without knowing the patient’s physiological, psychological, and cultural history so is it for a nurse trying to make sense out of the persistent problems and possibilities in nursing and health care.

To make right decisions in planning nursing’s future in the context of our complex health-care system, nurses must know the history of the actions being considered, the identities and points of view of the major players, and all the states that are at risk. These are the lessons of history. (Baer, D’Antonio, Rinker, & Lynaugh, 2001, p. 7) Some lessons from the past that support the understanding of political advocacy and action can be learned by examining how Flor - ence Nightingale influenced the development of nursing education programs that started in 1873, and led to what became known as the Modern Nursing Movement. It began with the first three United States Nightingale training schools: the Bellevue Training School for Nurses in New York City; the Boston Training School for Nurses at Massachusetts General in Boston; and the Con - necticut Training School in New Haven, Con - necticut. Following the opening of these three schools, hospitals around the country recog - nized the value that student nurses bring to the hospital because care could be provided at rela - tively low cost and the hospital would have no obligation to hire the nurses when they gradu - ated. Nurses, after their training was complete, would need to find work elsewhere, typically in private duty or in the emerging field of pub - lic health nursing. Twenty years after the opening of these schools of nursing, early nursing leaders 4 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action recognized the need to organize nurses to con - trol the quality of practice and training as a way to protect the public. Between 1893 and 1912, four professional nursing organizations formed to do just that: the National League for Nurses, formed in 1893 (originally called the American Society of Superintendents of Training Schools for Nurses); the American Nurses Association, started in 1896 (originally named the Nurses’ Associated Alumnae of the United States and Canada); the National Association of Colored Graduate Nurses, which formed to address ra - cial bias in nursing and health care and was in existence between 1908 and 1952; and finally, in 1912, the National Organization of Public Health Nursing, formed to control practice and educa - tional standards during the rising movement of public health and public health nursing in the United States. This organization ended in 1952 when the National League for Nursing assumed its role (Lewenson, 1993). Even before women in the United States gained the vote in 1920, nurses sought legis - lation that would define nursing practice, and they advocated for the protection of the pub - lic by prohibiting anyone who was not profes - sionally trained from calling him- or herself a nurse. This required convincing lawmakers, at that time only men, to support nursing legisla - tion; the nurses knew they could not vote into law the early nurse practice acts. While nurses struggled for statewide nursing registration, they had to “fight battles against long hours of work and opposition to nursing education” ( Lewenson, 1993, p. 171). To accomplish their goals, some nurses, either individually or through the early nursing organizations, began to support the work of the suffragist movement and aligned themselves with the larger women’s movement of the early 1900s. Individual nursing leaders, like public health pioneer Lillian Wald and nursing suffragist Lavinia Dock, advocated for health - care reforms in the community and the legisla - tive arena. The professional organizations that formed during this period did so to protect the public from uneducated nurses and to develop standards for nursing education and practice. Although an in-depth history of this period is beyond the scope of this chapter, it is im - portant for nurses to understand that political advocacy was part of the profession’s early iden - tity. Political advocacy and action in nursing are not new or innovative. Nurses have always been political advocates for those in their care (Lewenson, 2012). As a result, the early efforts made by nurses and their professional orga - nizations provide a narrative for and insight into today’s advocacy efforts, where protection of the public means ensuring a level of educa - tion for all nurses, the development of quality and safety standards, and the ability of nurses to practice to the fullest extent of their educa - tion, as recommended by an Institute of Med - icine report (2010).

History Counts Fairman and D’Antonio (2013) wrote, “history counts in health policy debates” (p. 346). Bring - ing a historical perspective to discussions about health care deepens our understanding of the is - sues by recognizing the evolution of ideas across time. In the debate about control of the “newly” minted medical homes of today, understanding the roles of early public health nurses in provid - ing primary healthcare services to individuals, families, communities, and populations in both urban and rural settings can trigger some use - ful ideas or solutions about what to call the new entity, who should finance it, and who should lead it (Keeling & Lewenson, 2013). The current debate centered on medical homes provides such an example. The term was first coined in the 1960s and defined a medical model of care for chronically ill pediatric pa - tients that looked at control issues, inter- and intradisciplinary issues of providing care, and the financial aspects of care. Physicians led the earlier medical home movement that has evolved to mean “a model of primary care that is accessi - ble, continuous, comprehensive, family-centered, coordinated, compassionate and culturally ef - fective” (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2002, as cited in Keeling & Lewenson, 2013, p. 360). Nurses as Advocates 5 and found support for the venture from philan - thropists and other nursing leaders. Wald’s work expanded from just nine public health nurses working in one settlement house that was estab - lished in 1893 to more than 250 nurses working throughout the New York City area in at least seven different locations (Buhler- Wilkerson, 2001; Keeling, 2007; Lewenson, 1993). The Henry Street Settlement was one of the few pub - lic health organizations to hire black nurses to care for black patients (Pitt-Mosley, 1996). This policy of inclusion did not exist in most health - care settings, and discrimination was typically the order of the day, whether in the north or south or whether conscious or unconscious. While caring for the families, Wald saw a close relationship between the health of the pub - lic and civil responsibility. In a speech she deliv - ered in 1900 at the sixth annual meeting of the American Society of Superintendents of Train - ing Schools for Nurses, Wald said that “among the many opportunities for civic and altruistic work pressing on all sides nurses having superior advantages in their practical training should not rest content with being only nurses, but should use their talents wherever possible in reform and civic movements” (Wald, 1900, as cited in Birnbach & Lewenson, 1991, p. 318). In keep - ing with her beliefs, Wald and her colleagues at Henry Street introduced several legislative ini - tiatives that would improve the health of chil - dren, such as the introduction of nurses in public schools (Wald, 1915). Wald (1915) described how she advocated for hiring nurses in the local pub - lic schools to decrease truancy rates, given that children were sent home due to illness and lack of treatment. As of 1897, physicians had only recently been hired by the New York City De - partment of Health to assess children in school.

Doctors sent children home from school when any contagious illnesses were found. However, this did not address some of the pressing health issues because the physicians did not provide treatment for conditions such as trachoma, a contagious eye infection that plagued school- age children at the time. Wald (1915) wrote about her experience convincing legislators of Nurses use the words that define the medical home of today to describe nursing’s work of providing accessible, continuous, comprehen - sive, family-centered, coordinated, compassion - ate, and culturally effective care. Knowing the history of nursing serves to highlight the pro - fession’s strong contribution to health care in the United States.

▸ Advocacy and Public Health Nursing Exploring some of the public health initiatives that Wald established—the Henry Street Set - tlement and the American Red Cross Town & Country—offers excellent examples of how nurs - ing, history, and political advocacy and action intersect. By studying the work of those nurses and nursing leaders within these settings, we not only learn about the role nurses played in primary health care (as described by Keeling & Lewenson, 2013), but we can also learn about the healthcare advocacy that public health nurses sought for those individuals, families, and com - munities. We also learn about the unconscious and conscious bias shared by society, includ - ing nurses, towards black nurses and the sub - sequent outcome that race played in healthcare outcomes. The next section uses these two early 20th-century public health initiatives as exam - ples of political advocacy by public health nurses.

Advocacy at Henry Street Lillian Wald graduated from nurses’ training in 1891 from the 2-year diploma-based program at New York Hospital in New York City. Within 2 years of graduating, she and her school friend Mary Brewster recognized the overwhelming healthcare needs of immigrant families living in the overcrowded and unclean conditions of the tenement houses on the Lower East Side of New York City. Filled with a sense of social ob - ligation to improve the health of society, Wald and Brewster began the Henry Street Settlement 6 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action Within 1 month, the experiment was deemed successful, and an “enlightened Board of Esti - mate and Apportionment voted $30,000 for the employment of trained nurses, the first mu - nicipalized school nurses in the world” (Wald, 1915, p. 53). School nursing continues to be a concern for those interested in political advo - cacy to improve the health of our young and vulnerable populations. Historian Mary Gibson (2017) writes that: Today’s philosophy still reflects the pro - tective and hopeful beliefs of leaders in education of 100 years ago concerning the influence of child health on our nation’s future.  .  . therefore, keeping children in school, healthy and ready to learn, is a universal goal throughout the United States. (p. 37) Advocacy in the Town & Country Wald’s advocacy extended to families living in rural settings. One of the most compelling ex - amples is the establishment of the American Red Cross Rural Nursing Service (later known as the Town & Country). As Keeling and Lewen - son wrote (2013), this organization “served as the point of contact for families in rural com - munities where remoteness, isolation, and fewer physicians and nurses created barriers to care” (p. 362). Wald believed that the American Red Cross—already organized to provide nursing ser - vices during wartime and natural or manmade disasters—was the right vehicle in which to or - ganize public health nursing services throughout the country during peacetime (Dock, Pickett, Clement, Fox, & Van Meter, 1922; Keeling & Lewenson, 2013). Through Wald’s influence, philanthropists supported the implementation of this new rural public health nursing service.

During the first year, criteria were established for nurses who would collaborate with community leaders, physicians, and families to provide both curative and preventive health care in rural set - tings. The requirements to become a rural pub - lic health nurse were far reaching and included the value of assigning public health nurses in the schools in her book The House on Henry Street . In 1902, when a reform administration came into power, the medical staff was reduced, the physicians’ salary was increased to $100 per month, and they were expected to work only 3 hours per day. The health commissioner or - dered an examination of all public school pu - pils and was horrified to learn of the prevalence of trachoma. Thousands of children were sent away from school because of this infection.

Where medical inspections were the most thor - ough, the classrooms were empty. It was ironic that Wald watched the children who had been turned away from school playing with the chil - dren they had been sent home to protect. Few children received treatment, and it followed that truancy was encouraged: The time had come when it seemed right to urge the addition of the nurse’s service to that of the doctor. My colleagues and I offered to show that with her assistance few children would lose their valuable school time and that it would be possible to bring under treatment those who needed it.  .  .  . I exacted a promise from several of the city officials that if the experiment were successful, they would use their influence to have the nurse, like the doctor, paid from public funds. Four schools from which there had been the greatest number of exclusions for medical causes were selected, and an experienced nurse, who possessed tact and initiative, was chosen from the settlement staff to make the demonstration. . . . Many of the children needed only disinfectant treatment of the eyes, collodion ap - plied to ringworm, or instruction as to cleanliness, and such were returned at once to the class with a minimum loss of precious school time. Where more serious conditions existed the nurse called at the home. (Wald, 1915, pp. 51–52) Advocacy and Public Health Nursing 7 and urban public health settings. These courses were valuable for nurses who practiced in rural settings because they did not have the same sup - port systems as urban areas. Black nurses faced barriers to attending some of these early public health courses and, as a result, contributed to few entering this ser - vice. Frances Elliot Davis, a graduate of the Freed - man’s School of Nursing in Washington, DC, did attend the 4-month program at Teachers College and was admitted as a Town & Country nurse in 1917. She was considered the first black nurse to be admitted into the American Red Cross (Hine, 1989; Lewenson, 1993). Influenced by the return - ing soldiers and the influenza pandemic in 1918, Davis, along with other black nurses, were finally accepted into the American Red Cross reserves at the end of World War I. The bias of the mili - tary and, subsequently, the American Red Cross, reared itself in several ways. One of the most bla - tant ways was the designation of race on each of these nurses’ badges, separating them from their white colleagues. Frances Elliot Davis received her badge with the number 1-A inscribed on the back. This was one way the Red Cross that served as the gatekeeper into the Army Nurses Corps could maintain the practice of segregated living quarters and segregated health care. The National Association of Colored Graduate nurses advo - cated changes in these practices that eventually ended by mid-20th century (Lewenson, 2017). Wald’s advocacy extended to the use of me - dia to show the public what a rural public health nurse could do and to garner support for the initiative. While she was at the third meeting of the American Red Cross Committee on Ru - ral Nursing—the committee established by the American Red Cross in 1912 to develop the cri - teria for the Town & Country—Wald suggested that the committee “get in touch with the Publi - cation Syndicate, and Rural Nursing written up possible [ sic] in story form for the Ladies’ Home Journal and other popular magazines” (American Red Cross Town & Country Nursing Service, 1913, p. 2). At the same meeting, it was noted that Wald and others supported establishing a relationship with the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company pragmatic skills. Nurses were expected to ride a bicycle or a horse, or drive a car so that they could access their patients.

© fotorobs/Shutterstock More important, and often difficult to find, were nurses who had an education that prepared them to negotiate and collaborate with others in the community. Typical nurses’ training programs did not provide these skills. It was determined that a minimum of a 4-month education was needed to prepare nurses to work independently in com - munities across America (American Red Cross Rural Nursing Service, 1912–1914). Educational programs were established, like the one at Teach - ers College in New York, in conjunction with the Henry Street Settlement and the rural District Nursing Service of Northern Westchester, soon after the American Red Cross Rural Nursing Ser - vice formed. By 1914, the new public health nurse curriculum offered courses in sociology, munici - pal and rural sanitation, and experiences in rural 8 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action the debate, and to offer a “way to think about the future” (Fairman & D’Antonio, 2013, p. 346). The work of the nurses at the Henry Street Settlement and the American Red Cross Town & Country gives two examples that can stimulate discussions about healthcare reform today. Readers are en - couraged to explore the many historical studies being completed and the early writings of nurses that can be found in nursing journals, such as the American Journal of Nursing . This journal has digitalized its entire collection from 1900 to the present, allowing readers to access arti - cles online and explore nursing advocacy over time. The American Association for the History of Nursing (AAHN) (www.aahn.org) also pro - vides information and resources for where one can go to find nursing archives, learn more about historical methods, and attend the association’s annual meeting where the latest in historical re - search is presented. The AAHN also publishes a well-respected journal, Nursing History Review , where readers can find outstanding historical research by leading historians. There are also many archival centers around the country, such as the Barbara Bates Center for the Study of the History of Nursing at the University of Pennsyl - vania and the Eleanor Crowder Bjoring Center for Nursing Historical Inquiry at the Univer - sity of Virginia. Centers such as these provide a wealth of archival data and support for those interested in historical research. The websites for these centers and other resources are avail - able on the AAHN website.

Nursing’s Political Advocacy and Action The next part of this chapter moves from the historical to the contemporary and further ex - plores the meaning of advocacy and action, as well as what that means for nurses, the profes - sion, and the health of the public. Today nurses must be politically active in professional nursing practice and health policy issues like the nurse reformers and activists before them. Nurses who can purposefully and effectively contribute to and the Steel Corporation whereby the Rural Nursing Service would “undertake nursing for these large concerns” (American Red Cross Town & Country Nursing Service, 1913, p. 4). Many of the communities in question were rural mining communities that required public health nursing services. The committee believed this relationship would be beneficial in many ways, including pos - sibly raising the standards of other nursing asso - ciations and economically supporting the cost of nursing supervision in these locations. Advocacy took many forms, which ranged from sitting on national committees to seeing that care was provided at local levels. The work of the public health nurse was framed by the needs of the community, the kinds of public healthcare organizations that were organized, and the geographical location. Each Red Cross rural nurse chapter—whether in the moun - tains of New Hampshire, in Kentucky, or in the West—directed the kinds of work that public health nurses would do, including bedside care for frostbite, well-baby clinics, school nursing, industrial nursing, classes in home hygiene and care of the sick, advocacy on town boards, and educational and publicity efforts about their work (Fox, 1921). Sometimes there was only one pub - lic health nurse in an area. At other times, pub - lic health nurses shared a district. Sometimes a nurse faced barriers by communities that were uncomfortable with outsiders offering care. The success of these American Red Cross Town & Country nurses relied on the ability to recruit and retain those who could handle the challenges of rural settings. This concern remained a constant and enduring problem throughout the life span of the American Red Cross Town & Country.

▸ History and Political Advocacy Political advocacy requires the depth and breadth of an evolving historical narrative to inform con - temporary debates in health care, to reflect the variety of perspectives that history can bring to History and Political Advocacy 9 Association suggests that high-quality nursing practice include advocacy as an essential aspect of patient care (ANA, n.d.). Advocacy is consid - ered both a philosophical principle of the profes - sion and a part of ethical nursing practice that ensures that the rights and safety of the patient are protected and safeguarded. Advocacy is the one professional construct that demonstrates a complex interaction among nurses, patients, professional colleagues, and the public (Se - landers & Crane, 2012). It is important to note that patients have rights and nurses have a le - gal and moral obligation to protect those rights.

As patient advocates, the ANA Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements (2015) offers nurses a moral framework to help shape their values to direct and influence actions so as inspire their advocacy. From the classroom to the bedside to the boardroom, nurses can leverage their professional expertise to provide the critical knowledge and analysis to transform public health policy and nursing practice. As stakeholders who are well prepared to engage in the policy-making pro - cess, nurses must stand ready to respond to an array of healthcare reforms confronting the na - tion’s delivery system by being full partners, with physicians and other healthcare professionals, in redesigning health care in the United States (IOM, 2010). Just as our “foremothers” before us, and in some cases fathers as well, nurses of the 21st century have an integral role in shaping and advancing policy solutions at a time when there is tumultuous political climate and a health care environment that may not clearly under - stand the values and contributions of nurses and nursing practice. Berkowitz (2017) recently described how important the need is for nurses to inform con - sumers about what nursing care is, including why and how it prevents illness, manages symp - toms, treats disease, and transforms the health of communities. Nickitas and Ferguson (2017) note how critical it is to advocate for and ensure that nurses globally can practice to the full scope of their education and licensure, have equal op - portunities for career development, and practice shaping public policy at the national, state, and local levels serve both the public and the profes - sion by advancing the nation’s health and pro - fessional practice. Nursing’s historical roots in important advocacy and action have shaped the profession’s political astuteness and work to keep pace with professional regulatory, statutory, and legal changes in education, practice, and research. The profession must remain nimble and responsive to policy changes by promoting and protecting the well-being of the population and nurses themselves. How can nurses have a profound influence on health outcomes? The answer is simple: We cannot afford not to. As long as the United States lags behind other de - veloped countries in care outcomes, despite the fact that the U.S. spends more on health care— $3.2 trillion in 2015, up 5.8% from the year be - fore (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [CMS], 2015)—nurses need to advocate and act to promote health, prevent disease, and eliminate health disparities. Access to affordable, quality health care is a basic human right for all peo - ple (Daley, 2012). In 2010, Institute of Medicine (IOM), now known as the National Academies of Medicine, published its report, The Future of Nursing , which offered a blueprint for how the nursing profes - sion should advocate to improve the health of the nation, lead change in healthcare delivery, and increase the educational preparation of the nursing workforce. This blueprint is evidence on how nurses uphold the dignity and well- being of society by revolutionizing how nurses can be change agents and leaders in develop - ing healthcare delivery systems that will address health disparities and the social determinants of health like education, poverty, transportation, and housing. To effectively manage the ever-evolving healthcare delivery system, as well as the emerg - ing needs of populations and the profession, ev - ery nurse must understand and appreciate his or her role in advocacy. Advocacy is the ability to use one’s voice and position to address, sup - port, and protect the rights and interest of an - other (Zolnierek, 2012). The American Nurses 10 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action work environment in their care (Smith, 1995).

By strengthening the protection of human rights and health equity, and promoting a Culture of Health, all can prosper and thrive. The next sec - tion of this chapter discusses how nurses will continue to amplify their voices and advocate to meet the changing landscape of health care.

▸ Nursing Strong Professional nursing care is essential to the healthcare system. Of the more than 3.6 million licensed registered nurses (RNs), approximately 84.7% are employed in nursing (62% in hospitals), and approximately 10% are employed in primary care or home care (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2010, 2013), making reg - istered nursing the largest healthcare profession (ANA, n.d.). As such, nurses must advocate by bringing problems to the government and seek decisions in the form of programs, laws, regu - lations, or other official responses that create innovations and care models to transform the delivery and advance the nation’s health. To begin, nursing must advocate for changes within the profession. To successfully advance health care, the nursing profession must make significant strides to change the composition of the future workforce. This will require greater efforts toward the successful recruitment of underrepresented minorities into nursing.

Calculations of data from the U.S. Census Bureau (n.d.) reveal that the current RN work - force remains primarily female; the percentage of men in the workforce has increased to 12% from only 9% in 2001. Nurses from minority backgrounds represent 24% of the RN workforce.

Considering racial/ethnic backgrounds, the RN population is composed of 75.8% white, 11.5% black or African American, 4.8% His - panic or Latino, 5.8% Asian, 0.5% American Indian, 0.028% Native Alaskan, 0.2% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 0.1% Other Native, and 1% multiracial background (DATAUSA, 2018). The profession must do better to ensure that future nurses mirror the patient population in work environments that are free from vio - lence, harassment, and discrimination; these concerns are essential in today’s and tomorrow’s healthcare delivery system. To become engaged in advocacy, and to set the agenda for human resources and nursing resources for health care, nurses must be at the forefront of policy engage - ment, dialogue, and implementation. This en - gagement requires sound evidence and a political strategy that allows for increased understand - ing of the potential impact of linking the nurs - ing workforce with the globalization of health care, to ensure dignified and respectful health care for all persons, regardless of sexual orien - tation or gender identity (Nickitas & Ferguson, 2017). The demands for increased access and better healthcare outcomes will require nurs - ing to widen its influence in policy areas that address the health and healthcare needs of un - derserved and minority populations (Villarruel, Bigelow, & Alvarez, 2014). Nurses are essential healthcare providers and make significant con - tributions to the body of knowledge of improv - ing health and health care in the United States.

One way nurses can impact the nation’s health is to meet the 21st-century challenge of pop - ulation health management and population health. To meet this challenge, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWFJ; 2015) has com - mitted to advancing a national initiative called the Culture of Health by addressing key social determinants of health and empowering sup - port mechanisms to help people live healthier lives. A Culture of Health involves creating in - creased collaboration among healthcare systems.

For community organizations, this means mak - ing health a shared value, creating healthier and more equitable communities, and strengthen - ing the integration of health services and sys - tems (Martsolf et al., 2016). As political advocates, nurses are uniquely positioned to lead system change to improve care for populations and contribute to a Culture of Health in their communities by focusing on the patient and family-centered care. Nurses natu - rally view their patients holistically and seek to include all aspects of family, community, and Nursing Strong 11 Fostering interprofessional education and prac - tice builds the health team’s capacity to view high-risk vulnerable and underserved pop - ulations as a moral imperative and, as such, bring important perspectives to designing and delivering health services that are transforma - tive to improving health, lowering costs, and increasing patient satisfaction. To address care gaps and avoid service du - plication, improve the quality of patient-centered care, and control costs within and across set - tings, nurses must understand and interpret legislation and health policy. By being able to interpret healthcare reform from a nursing per - spective, nurses can determine how to best dis - tribute resources to individuals, families, and populations. For example, chronic disease is the central healthcare problem in the United States and is the leading cause of disability and death in the United States (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2015; Miller, Lasiter, Bartlett Ellis, & Buelow, 2015). In fact, nearly one in two Americans suffers from chronic con - ditions such as diabetes, arthritis, hypertension, and kidney disease; these account for 7 of 10 deaths among Americans each year and 75% of the nation’s healthcare spending (Conway, Goodrich, Macklin, Sasse, & Cohen, 2011). The obesity epidemic and growing levels of prevent - able diseases and chronic conditions greatly contribute to the high costs of health care. Additionally, an aging population has in - creased the demand to address end-of-life care in a cost-effective manner (Rice & Betcher, 2010). Because chronic disease remains the pri - mary healthcare problem in the United States, nurses can lead change to improve the healthcare system at the population level (Lathrop, 2013; Miller, Lasiter, Bartlett Ellis, & Buelow, 2015).

As skilled researchers and clinicians, nurses are in key positions to advocate, lead, and partic - ipate in interprofessional initiatives, commu - nity coalitions, and policy enactments. Being a nurse advocate means joining the ranks of the nation’s care decision makers in order to become full partners in redesigning health care (IOM, 2011; Peltzer et al., 2015). for which they will provide nursing care. The recruitment of indivdiuals from underrepre - sented groups in nursing— specifically men and individuals from African American, His - panic, Asian, American Indian, and Native Alaskan backgrounds—is a major priority for the nursing profession. There is a moral imperative to achieve eq - uity and diversity, which involves increasing underrepresented groups in nursing, embrac - ing the policy process, and creating a cultur - ally and linguistically diverse care environment. A diverse healthcare workforce increases both minority participation in the health professions and a commitment towards cultural compe - tency in the treatment of all patients. A U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services report (2006) reveals that increased diversity among healthcare professionals leads to im - proved patient satisfaction, improved patient– nurse communication, and greater access to care for racial and ethnic minority patients who are best served by providers who are knowl - edgeable about their backgrounds and cul - tures. Increasing workforce diversity, ensuring fair and equal access to quality health care and healthcare resources, eliminating health dis - parities, and achieving health equity is where nursing’s political advocacy and action upholds the dignity of all people through our actions and our words. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Healthy People 2020 (2013) define health equity as the attainment of the highest level of health for all people. Achieving health equity for all requires a collective effort across all disciplines and all sectors, including those outside nurs - ing. Therefore, nurses must align themselves with other healthcare professionals to address health disparities and health equity, specifically within the context of the social determinants of health. As an interprofessional healthcare team, all professionals must “draw upon their moral responsibility to respond to human suffering and become acknowledged partici - pants in the nation’s efforts to correct health disparity” (Harrison & Falco, 2005, p. 261). 12 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action depend on their ability to give voice to a his - torical perspectives that recognize the political and contextual forces that shape health care and place nursing at the center of long-standing de - bate about health services delivery, knowledge formation, patient safety, technology and edu - cation for practice” (p. 351). To design and de - liver health services that are transformative in the direction that our nation needs at this mo - ment in time, we must remember how nursing’s historical influences of the past shape our ad - vocacy and actions of the future.

Discussion Questions 1. How does history inform nursing’s efforts to provide primary health care? 2. What is the relevance of nursing’s history to political advocacy today? 3. Describe the role of advocacy within the history of nursing’s development in the United States. 4. Select a community or population with which you could become a full partner in re designing and improving health out - comes to address a contemporary public health issue impacting this community or population, such as access to care, transportation, water safety, pollution, or gun safety. References American Academy of Nursing, Diversity and inclusivity statement . (2016). Retrieved from https://higherlogic download.s3.amazonaws.com/AANNET/c8a8da9e -918c-4dae-b0c6-6d630c46007f/UploadedImages/docs /Governance/2016%20AAN%20Proposed%20Revised %20Diversity%20Statement_FINAL.pdf American Association of the Colleges of Nursing. (2017). American Association of the Colleges of Nursing (AACN) position statement on diversity, inclusion, and equity in academic nursing. Journal of Professional Nursing , 33(2017), 173–174. Retrieved from http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2017.04.003 American Nurses Association. (2010). Nursing’s social policy statement: The essence of the profession (2010 edition). Silver Spring, MD: Author. American Nurses Association. (2015). Code of ethics for nurses with interpretive statements . Silver Spring, MD: Author. ▸ Conclusion The concepts of advocacy and action serve as a reference and model for the future, demonstrat - ing that all nurses can develop their influence and policy acumen to equip themselves with the knowledge and tools needed to serve the profession, healthcare organizations, and soci - ety. As the nursing profession reflects upon its historical roots in advocacy and action, nurses will strive to find innovative ways to advance the nation’s health to reshape healthcare de - livery, policy, and payment. These innovations must address the key social determinants of health that will empower and support all peo - ple to lead healthier lives. Developing competencies in advocacy and action requires a clear understanding of how to create healthier and more equitable communi - ties as well as strengthening health services and systems, creating diverse policy solutions, and building a consensus for evaluating policy solu - tions. For those who are just beginning to learn the advocacy process, it is important to recog - nize that there will always be divergent views around policy solutions, but the best solutions are those where diverse viewpoints are always heard, considered, and reflect consensus. With over 3 million strong, nurses have pro - vided evidence and reasoned solutions to health - care problems. This chapter has addressed how nurses have had a long and vital history of ad - vocacy and social action. It is through this ef - fort towards improving health outcomes for individuals, families, communities, and popu - lations that nurses are a valuable link to educate policymakers about health issues and promote policies to address contemporary public health issues. These issues include public health and emergency preparedness, food safety, hunger and nutrition, climate change and other envi - ronmental health issues, public health infra - structure, disease control, international health, and tobacco control (American Public Health Association, 2017). Fairman and D’Antonio (2013) note that “nurses successes in moving policy forward will 13 References Fairman, J. (2017). Foreword. In S. B. Lewenson, A. M. McAllister, & K. M. Smith (Eds.), Nursing history for contemporary role development. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company. Fairman, J., & D’Antonio, P. (2013). History counts: How history can shape our understanding of health policy. Nursing Outlook , 61(5), 346–352. Fox, E. (1921). Red Cross public health nursing, out to sea. Public Health Nurse , 13, 105–108. Gibson, M. E. (2017). School nursing: A challenging strategy in rural health care in the United States. In S. B. Lewenson, A. M. McAllister, & K. M. Smith (Eds.), Nursing history for contemporary role development (pp. 37–58). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company. Harrison, E., & Falco, S. M. (2005). Health disparity and the nurse advocate: Reaching out to alleviate suffering. Advances in Nursing Science , 28(3), 252–264. Hartman, M., Martin, A. B., Benson, J., & Catlin, A. (2013). National health spending in 2011: Overall growth remains low, but some payers and services show signs of acceleration. Health Affairs, 32 (1), 87–99. doi:10.1377/ hlthaff.2012.1206 Hine, D. C. (1989).  Black Women in White: Racial Conflict and Cooperation in the Nursing Profession 1890-1950 . Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Institute of Medicine. (2010). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health . Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Keeling, A. (2007). Nursing and the privilege of prescription, 1893–2000 . Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press. Keeling, A., & Lewenson, S. B. (2013). A nursing historical perspective on the medical home: Impact on health care policy. Nursing Outlook , 61(5), 360–366. http://dx .doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2013.07.003 Lathrop. B. (2013). Nursing leadership in addressing the social determinants of health. Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 14 (1), 41–47. http://dx.doi.org./10.1177/15271544 13489887 Lewenson, S. B. (1993). Taking charge: Nursing, suffrage, and feminism in America, 1873–1920 . New York, NY: Garland Publishing. Lewenson, S. B. (2012). A historical perspective on policy, politics, and nursing. In D. J. Mason, J. K. Leavitt, & M. W. Chafee (Eds.), Policy and politics in nursing and health care (6th ed., pp. 12–18). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders. Lewenson, S. B. (2017, September). Designation 1-A: The African-American experience in the American Red Cross Town and Country, 1912–1918. Paper presented at the American Association for the History of Nursing, Fairport, NY. Martsolf, G. R., Gordon, T., May, L. W., Mason, D. Sullivan, C., & Villarruel, A. (2016). Innovative nursing care models and culture of health: Early evidence. Nursing Outlook, 64(4), 367–376. American Nurses Association. (n.d.). Advocacy . Retrieved from http://www.nursingworld.org/Main-MenuCategories /ThePracticeofProfessional-NursingPatientSafetyQuality /Advocacy.aspx American Public Health Association. (2017). Topics & issues . Retrieved from https://www.apha.org/topics-and-issues American Red Cross Rural Nursing Service. (1912–1914). Circular for application. Rockefeller Sanitary Commission microfilm (Reel 1, Folder 8, Rockefeller Archives). Pocantico, NY: American Red Cross Town & Country Nursing Service. American Red Cross Town & Country Nursing Service. (1913). Minutes of the third meeting of the Committee on Rural Nursing. Rockefeller Sanitary Commission microfilm (Reel 1, Folder 8, Rockefeller Archives). Pocantico, NY: American Red Cross Town & Country Nursing Service. Baer, E. D., D’Antonio, P., Rinker, S., & Lynaugh, J. E. (2001). Enduring issues in American history . New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company. Berkowitz, B. (2017, July–August). Valuing science. Nursing Outlook, 65 (4), 351–352. Birnbach, N., & Lewenson, S. (Eds.). (1991). Work of women in municipal affairs. First words: Selected addresses from the National League for Nursing 1894–1933 . New York, NY: National League for Nursing. Buhler-Wilkerson, K. (2001). No place like home: A history of nursing and home care in the United States . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Leading causes of death and numbers of deaths, by sex, race, and Hispanic origin: United States, 1980 and 2014 (Table 19).  Health, United States, 2015 .  Retrieved from https://www.cdc .gov/nchs/data/hus/hus15.pdf#019 Center for Studying Health System Change. (2008, December). Making medical homes work: Moving from concept to practice. Policy Perspective: Insights into Health Policy Issues . Retrieved from http://www.hschange.org/CONTENT /1030/1030.pdf Centers for Medicare & Medicaid. (2015). National health expenditures 2015 highlights. Retrieved from https:// www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems /Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendDate /downloads/highlights.pdf Conway, P. H., Goodrich, K., Macklin, S., Sasse, B., & Cohen, J. (2011). Patient-centered care categorization of U.S. health care expenditures. Health Services Research , 46(2), 479–490. Daley, K. (2012, September–October). Health care as a basic human right. The American Nurse . D’Antonio, P., & Lewenson, S. B. (Eds.). (2011). Nursing interventions over time: History as evidence . New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company. Dock, L. L., Pickett, S. E., Clement, F., Fox, E. G., & Van Meter, A. R. (1922). History of American Red Cross nursing . New York, NY: Macmillan. 14 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services Administration. (2013). The U.S. nursing workforce: Trends in supply and education. Bureau of Health Professions, National Center for Health Workforce Analysis. Retrieved from http://bhpr .hrsa.gov/healthworkforce/reports/nursingworkforce /nursingworkforcefullreport.pdf U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2006). The rationale for diversity in the health professions: A review of the evidence . Retrieved from http://bhpr.hrsa.gov /healthworkforce/reports/diversityreviewevidence.pdf U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2010). The registered nurse population: Findings from the 2008 National Sample Survey of Registered Nurses . Rockville, MD: Author. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2013a). Health equities and disparities. Office of Minority Health. National Partnership for Action to End Health Disparities. Retrieved from http://www.minorityhealth.hhs.gov /npa/templates/browse.aspx?lvl =lvlid =34 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2013b). Foundation health measures: Disparities. HealthyPeople. gov. Retrieved from http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020 /about/disparitiesAbout.aspx U.S. Department of Labor. (2014). Labor force characteristics by race and ethnicity, 2014. Retrieved from http://www .bls.gov/opub/reports/race-and-ethnicity/archive/labor -force-characteristics-by-and-ethnicity-2014.pdf Villarruel, A., Bigelow, A., & Alvarez, C. (2014). Integrating the 3Ds: A nursing perspective. Public Health Reports , 2(129), 37–44. Wald, L. (1915). The house on Henry Street. New York, NY: Henry Holt & Company. Zolnierek, C. (2012). Speak to be heard: Effective nurse advocacy. American Nurse, 7 (10), 1. Miller, W. R., Lasiter, S., Bartlett Ellis, R., & Buelow, J. M. (2015). Chronic disease self-management: A hybrid concept analysis. Nursing Outlook, 63 (2), 154–161. Nickitas, D. M., & Ferguson, S. (2017). Investing in nursing: Improving health, gender equality, and economic growth. Nursing Economics, 35 (4), 158, 183. Orszag, P. R. (2008). The overuse, underuse, and misuse of health care. Testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance. Retrieved from http://www.cbo.gov/sites /default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/95xx/doc9567/07-17 -health-care_testimony.pdf Peltzer, J. N., Ford, D. J., Shen, Q., Fischgrund, A., Teel, C. S., Pierce, J. Jamison, M., & Waldon, T. (20153, March–April). Exploring leadership roles, goals, barriers among Kansas registered nurses: A descriptive cross-sectional study. Nursing Outlook, 634 (2), 117–123. Phillips, J., & Malone, B. (2014). Increasing racial/ethnic diversity in nursing to reduce health disparities and achieve health equity. Public Health Reports , 2(129), 45–50. Pitt-Mosley, M. O. (1996). Satisfied to carry the bag: Three black community health nurses’ contributions to health care reform, 1900–1937. Nursing History Review , 4, 65–82. Rice, E., & Betcher, D. (2010). Palliative care in an acute care hospital: From pilot to consultation service. MEDSURG Nursing , 19(2), 107–112. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. (2015). From vision to action: Measures to mobilize a Culture of Health. Princeton, NJ: Author. Selanders, L. C., & Crane, P. C. (2012). The voice of Florence Nightingale on advocacy. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing , 17(1) Manuscript 1. Smith, M. C. (1995). The core of advanced practice nursing. Nursing Science Quarterly , 8, 2–3. U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). American FactFinder. American Community Survey. 2014–2015. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs 15 References a medical provider or self-exams, are no longer recommended. (American Cancer Society, 2015) Therefore, women should have mammograms as desired or as suggested by their healthcare provider based on their personal medical history and risk factor(s). This relies on the fact that a person has health insurance that covers these costs or is able to go to a free or reduced cost clinic such as Planned Parenthood (PP) for health care and screenings. Planned Parenthood and other clinics rely on funding from the federal government to assist in the costs for these services. Planned Parenthood follows the recommendations of the American Cancer Society regarding breast self-exam and can refer a person to a medical site where mammograms are done as needed. Planned Parenthood may be the only option for a woman to receive the necessary care for a breast cancer screening referral. However, if the U.S. Congress decides to reduce or completely remove funding to Planned Parenthood, what will those women do for breast cancer screening? Congress assesses what monies will go to what groups and establishments based on a number of factors, including what is the agenda of the president and Congress at the time, what is beneficial for and needed by certain congressional districts, and other special interests. According to the American Public Health Association (APHA) (2017) and other websites, the federal government does not directly fund Planned Parenthood, but rather reimburses states that have paid Medicaid bills for services by such clinics as Planned Parenthood.

According to their annual report in 2015–2016, Planned Parenthood received 41% of their operating costs from government health services reimbursement and grants. With a portion of this money, Planned Parenthood did 321,700 breast exams and diagnosed 72,012 incidences of cancer through breast exams and Pap smears. If PP did not have this funding, these numbers would probably be much lower because some women would not have this care due to the inability to pay for it. For the past few years there has been a rolling debate about healthcare access and whether the federal and/or state governments will fund the health care needed by the working poor and uninsured who may not have the funds to pay for a mammogram. Initially, it seemed as though CASE STUDY Strength Is in Coalitions Pennie Sessler Branden Purpose of the Case Study The purpose of this case study is to describe an exemplar where nursing advocacy can be more effective through strong coalitions and partnerships.

The Case Study Breast cancer is the second most common form of cancer in women and is the second leading cause of cancer deaths. According to the American Cancer Society (ACS) (2017) breast cancer will affect 1 in 8 women during their lifetime and about 1 in 37 women will die of breast cancer. The statistics show that women of color and those in poverty have a higher incidence of breast cancer than white middle- and upper-class women. Breast cancer screening has been utilized to diagnose breast cancer early enough to improve the treatments, interventions, and outcomes for breast cancer. With 90% of registered nurses (RNs) being female, the American Nursing Association (ANA) (American Nurses Association, n.d.) has educated nurses to better understand breast cancer risk factors and the importance of regular screening. Nurses and other healthcare providers look to the ACS recommendations for mammogram schedules. These recommendations have gone through a number of permutations, but since 2015 the American Cancer Society recommendations state: Women with an average risk of breast cancer—most women—should begin yearly mammograms at age 45. Women should be able to start the screening as early as age 40, if they want to. At age 55, women should have mammograms every other year—though women who want to keep having yearly mammograms should be able to do so. Regular mammograms should continue for as long as a woman is in good health. Breast exams, either from 16 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action CASE STUDIES have recognized the importance of building partnerships and coalitions in order to maximize their efforts and have deliberately partnered with groups and organizations that support the many issues that nurses support. If Congress is only looking at the cost of care given by Planned Parenthood clinics we must look at the entire picture of cost of preventive care versus the cost of breast cancer treatment. With these statistics, one would think that breast cancer screening, which can reduce cost and suffering, would be covered by insurance. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) covers an annual mammogram, as do most insurance companies as mandated by the ACA. The average cost for a mammogram is $456 (MDsave, 2018). According to a retrospective analysis by Blumen, Polkus, and Fitch (2016), the costs of complete breast cancer treatment for 1 year were from $60,637 for Stage I/II treatments up to $134,682 for Stage IV treatments. Not only will there be costs for breast cancer care but there will be potential loss of wages affecting partners and families in addition to an immeasurable psychologic toll. This huge disparity in costs for preventive mammograms and the overall cost for treatment seems to emphasize the importance of preventive care over the need to wait and treat women who get breast cancer. However, with the potential changes in the ACA and the current unemployment and underemployment numbers, what happens to those women who cannot afford the cost of a mammogram or the cost of insurance?

Blumen and colleagues (2016) report that support for programs for breast cancer screening need to be implemented and strengthened to diagnose breast cancer and begin treatment earlier. With all of the political wrangling that occurs over the health and well-being of women, nurses have become advocates for these issues, and with their coalition partners have taken to Capitol Hill to educate their representatives and senators about the importance of healthcare coverage to include things like breast cancer screening. To accomplish this, (1) nurses will continue to educate their colleagues, patients, and families; (2) nurses will continue to meet with their representatives on the state and federal levels; (3) the ANA will continue to write position statements and nurses will testify in front of legislators; and (4) nurses need to bring real stories to their legislators about women with breast cancer who have benefitted from healthcare the Affordable Care Act (ACA) would reduce these disparities, and it has. However, some state governments have found ways to reduce the potential advantages that the ACA offers. For example, in New Jersey (NJ ), Medicaid funding for clinics that gave patients family-planning and well-women care along with referrals for mammograms was completely eliminated by Governor Christie in 2010 (Culp-Ressler, 2015).

Christie vetoed those spending bills five times in 5 years. Consequently, between 2010 and 2015, there was a 25.1% increase in breast and cervical cancer cases in Latina women in New Jersey. This was five times higher than women overall in that state (Culp-Ressler, 2015). Clearly the elimination of this funding has affected and will affect overall screening and care of vulnerable groups unable to pay for these expensive services. Contrary to this, a mid-July 2017 article by Brodesser-Akner reports that NJ legislators have enough votes with Democrats and Republicans together to override a governor’s veto for $7.5 million for funding to family-planning clinics, including Planned Parenthood. They believe that the previous vetoes have significantly reduced opportunities for NJ women to obtain necessary health care and that this funding is integral to improving the health of all NJ women. New Jersey is just one example of the ongoing divisiveness that has taken place over the funding of family planning and women’s health clinics by state and federal governments.

This is not a new debate but one that has been in discussion for decades. The American Public Health Association (APHA) published a policy statement in 1991 emphasizing that minority women are at higher risk of death from breast cancer than white women and that education and regular screening are integral to the efforts of healthcare providers to reduce the occurrence of breast cancer and to improve overall outcomes.

Even with this data-driven information, the federal government currently wants to eliminate funding to Planned Parenthood, thus potentially reducing access to breast exams and early detection of breast cancer for the millions of women who utilize these clinics annually. Nurses have been involved in lobbying efforts to better educate and assist our representatives to understand the importance of breast screening for all women regardless of socioeconomic status. Further, nurses Case Study 17 CASE STUDIES Summary This case study is one relevant example of the potential for possible negative outcomes related to decreased funding by governmental agencies; it also delineates the potential positive outcomes that are achieved with partnering, collaboration, and coalition building. Even though the issue of continued funding for Planned Parent clinics is not addressed directly, successes can be made incrementally that will increase support of important healthcare programs moving forward. Advocacy, in order to influence policy, is best operationalized through partnerships, collaboration, and coalitions. Although someone in power, such as Governor Christie, can veto a bill to reduce funding to a particular group, the representatives in the New Jersey legislature can introduce bills that can, with a bipartisan majority, override a veto by the governor. Similarly, the Connecticut Nurses Association maximizes its efforts through collaborating and partnering with various groups to form strong influential coalitions that can educate legislators about all of the pieces of breast cancer prevention and care.

The combined efforts, along with the increased numbers of individuals actively participating in the process, enhances the work of lobbyists, who in turn influence the policymakers. The overall consequence is the increase in the voice of the public that influences the outcomes. This influence enhances the possibility of providing more adequate healthcare services to all citizens.

Case Study Questions 1. This case is a good example of nursing power through building partnerships and coalitions that have similar missions. Can you identify two coalitions that your state nursing association actively works with? Can you describe the policy issues that these coalitions address? 2. Successful advocacy is best defined as moving toward the ultimate goal(s) in a positive, substantive manner. Explain what advocacy you have done, besides direct patient advocacy, to support health care in your nursing specialty. References American Cancer Society. (2015, October 20). American Cancer Society releases new breast cancer guideline. Retrieved from access and insurance, as well as stories where a person suffered due to lack of access and/or insurance. Nurses will continue to advocate for their patients and what is best for them by enlarging their reach through coalitions and partnerships.

The Connecticut Nurses Association (CNA) is guided each year by their Connecticut (CT ) legislative agenda and their prioritization of issues, which is informed by nurses and their relationships and partnerships with organizations across the healthcare and health spectrum.

The CNA regularly engages in advocacy on health and nursing throughout the year and during the legislative session. To address the widespread impact of healthcare reform, the CNA is actively involved in the campaign entitled Protect Our Care CT (PCCT ) (Connecticut Nurses Association, 2017). PCCT represents a coalition of organizations and individuals to support and represent the health needs of people of CT, including those who rely on the ACA, Medicare and Medicaid, and women’s health programs (personal interview Clear Sandor, 2017). For example, the CT Senate Bill 586 supported state Medicaid expansion of health benefits for children and women (State of Connecticut General Assembly, 2017). There is a long history of CNA’s active participation in the state regarding access to essential services and their partnership with other groups and coalitions; the CNA has supported this bill for increased essential benefits and access to care and members have been very vocal about this to their legislators through lobbying efforts, letters, etc. Although the bill does not increase funding for or access to breast screening mammograms, it does mandate breast cancer counseling, genetic testing, and risk assessment. In the future this bill could be expanded to include mandated mammograms no matter what a person’s insurance status is. This is an example of the impact of indirect action by multiple groups, including nurses, in strong coalitions. The CNA works collaboratively with its coalitions to strategically exert its influence and increase its voice on multiple healthcare issues that affect women. Coalition building is a key piece of being heard and getting legislation passed. Coalitions have provided nurses with a strong voice and enhanced their ability to provide high-quality, safe care.

18 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action CASE STUDIES http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/07/christie _facing_open_rebellion_as_gop_lawmakers_vo.html Connecticut Nurses Association. (2017). CT coalition to advocate for health coverage . Retrieved from http://cqrcengage .com/ctnurses/home Culp-Ressler, T. (2015, February 26). The human costs of Chris Christie’s attack on Planned Parenthood . ThinkProgress. Retrieved from https://thinkprogress.org/the-human -costs-of-chris-christies-attack-on-planned-parenthood -b565d0bd790d MDsave Incorporated. (2018). How much does a mammogram screening cost? Retrieved from https://www.mdsave .com/procedures/mammogram/d786fcc5 Personal interview: Kimberly Clear Sandor. (August 1 and 9, 2017).Planned Parenthood (2017, July 26). Annual Report 2015-2016. Retrieved from https://www.plannedparenthood.org /uploads/filer_public/18/40/1840b04b-55d3-4c00-959d -11817023ffc8/20170526_annualreport_p02_singles.pdf Reger, A. (2015, September 23). State statutes on breast cancer screening and coverage. Connecticut Office of Legislative Research Research Report 2015-R-0210. Retrieved from https://www.cga.ct.gov/2015/rpt/pdf/2015-R-0210.pdf State of Connecticut General Assembly. (2017, January). Senate Bill No. 586 . Retrieved from https://www.cga .ct.gov/2017/TOB/s/2017SB-00586-R01-SB.htm https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/american-cancer -society-releases-new-breast-cancer-guidelines.html American Cancer Society. (2017). About breast cancer. Retrieved from https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/CRC/PDF /Public/8577.00.pdf American Nurses Association. (n.d.). Women’s health . Retrieved from https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/work -environment/health-safety/healthy-nurse-healthy-nation /womens-health/ American Public Health Association. (2017). Cervical and breast screening. Retrieved from https://www.apha .org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy -statements/policy-database/2014/07/29/13/51 /cervical-and-breast-screening Blumen, H., Polkus, V., & Fitch, K. (2016, February) Comparison of treatment costs for breast cancer, by tumor stage and type of service. American Health & Drug Benefits for Payers, Purchasers, Policymakers, and Other Healthcare Stakeholders , 9(1). Retrieved from http://www .ahdbonline.com/articles/2076-comparison-of-treatment -costs-for-breast-cancer-by-tumor-stage-and-type -of-service Brodesser-Akner, C. (2017, July 12). Christie faces rebellion from 5 Republican lawmakers over Planned Parenthood funding. Advance Media for New Jersey. Retrieved from Case Study 19 CASE STUDIES in politics, which she defines as “public service,” is her early commitment to caring for the homeless in community health nursing, which became the foundation of her academic career: to understand policy and serve “the many.” She attributes her incremental successes, beginning from the day when she was late to her graduate school class, to being coached by mentors such as Catherine Malloy in Charleston, South Carolina, with whom she continued to work throughout her doctoral program in nursing administration and policy at George Mason University. Using what she learned from her study of health policy, she became active in her local city government and organizations such as the League of Women Voters and a federal health clinic that served the homeless. In these experiences, public policy was “made real” and prompted her continued volunteer service in other nonprofit organizations. She claims that she learned from working with these groups that as nurses, we do not have to stay in our lane of just working with other nurses.

She learned how to organize, to use her health knowledge to work for things that people care about, and to build coalitions of groups for action.

She says that a leader at the League of Women Voters told her that she “had what it takes—drive, personality, and skills—to think about running for office,” which she tucked away at that time. With her husband in the military at the time, she moved to Washington D.C. Entering the doctoral program, still moonlighting as a nurse, she continued to grow into real public policy experiences that were fueled by taking care of homeless veterans and at-risk populations. To make a real impact, she believed that we had to elect nurses who could make a difference, but she realized she needed experience to be taken seriously. Along the way, it was nurse mentors who connected her with Capitol Hill opportunities on an assignment that would influence a dissertation and numerous other connections, including Bob Dole and Ted Kennedy from a U.S. Senate Committee. While a student, she served as a U.S. Senate Fellow and a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services policy analyst for the Secretary’s Commission on Nursing. In her own words, she was not afraid to pick up the phone, encouraged by her mentor, and ask if the national commission studying the nursing shortage needed a policy graduate student—for CASE STUDY A Career in Politics to Role Model:

Bethany Hall-Long’s Nursing Pathway to the Lieutenant Governor’s Office in Delaware Veronica D. Feeg A career in politics might be the aspiration for a college student in political science or pre-law, but is seldom one for a nursing student. In fact, courses in health policy or politics may be absent or scarce in nursing undergraduate or graduate curricula, and the notion to become active in politics is unlikely. In fact, Bethany Hall-Long, first woman Lieutenant Governor of Delaware, would be the first to admit that it was not in her plans in the beginning of her personal journey. In fact, she attributes her current position, stated with candor in her numerous inspirational presentations to nurses over the years, to her tardiness for class when the only seminar topic left for students to choose was about nurses in politics—and she was “stuck with it” (personal interview Hall-Long, 2017). Although she only learned after she won her first race in 2002 that her great-grandfather had been a member of the Delaware House of Representatives, she had little kitchen table discussion about politics growing up. In fact, her farm upbringing and spiritual roots in rural Delaware taught her about taking care of people— “where much is given, much is expected, and it is how you treat the least among us” (personal interview Hall-Long, 2017)—but not about public policy. What is noteworthy in this model career 20 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action CASE STUDIES issues that matter to nurses—jobs, environment, transportation, and environmental justice, as well as health care in general and women’s health in particular. Returning as a faculty member to Delaware, her home state, she decided that her public health and health policy student assignments gave her reasons to run because:

(a) she desired to make a significant contribution; (b) she had been well prepared to understand process and as a nurse, she already understood the needs; and (c) the opportunity presented itself to run for the Delaware General Assembly. In her own words, her public life since 2000 did not begin smoothly—she won the primary but lost her first race by 1% in a race against a long-term male incumbent. But she says that she learned from that experience, pulled herself up by her bootstraps, ran again in 2002, and won in a tough election against the local school board president. She served continuously as the first nurse elected to the Delaware General Assembly from 2003 to 2017, as a member of the Delaware House of Representatives from 2003 to 2009, and then in the Delaware Senate from 2009 to 2017. She lists among her accomplishments cosponsoring a range of legislation including the Governor’s Cancer Council and the Health Fund Advisory (Master Tobacco Settlement) Committee. She was the prime House sponsor of legislation creating a cancer consortium for Delaware. She cosponsored a blue ribbon task force to analyze the problem of chronic illness in Delaware and make policy recommendations. She cosponsored needle exchange legislation that has made an impact on HIV infection rates, and she updated the state’s indoor tanning laws to prohibit children under age 14 years from using tanning beds and for those age 14 to 18 years to require parental consent (Hall-Long, 2007, 2012).

Among her legislative accomplishments during her Senate years, she chaired several important committees including health care, community and county affairs, transportation committee, veterans committee, and insurance committee, among others, where nurses can play a significant role. Her political campaigns and subsequent elections over these years are remarkable (see TABLE 1-1), but she acknowledges that it is not easy to run for office. She describes “running” for office as just that: experiences good and bad teach us how to continue on a path if we are passionate free. This opportunity gave her access to the four presidents of the Tri-Council for Nursing (American Nurses Association [ANA], National League for Nursing [NLN], American Association of Colleges of Nursing [AACN], and American Organization of Nurse Executives [AONE]) at age 25. She grew friendships and experience that laid the framework for her dissertation. Lt. Governor Hall-Long’s doctoral dissertation is noteworthy: A Policy Process Model: Analysis of the Nurse Education Act (NEA) of 1991–1992. Along with her work in politics, she studied the policy process, knowing clearly that public service mandates an understanding of public policy. This exploratory case study examined a theoretical model and applied it to explain the Tri-Council for Nursing’s political efforts during the reauthorization of the Nurse Education Act that year. She interviewed members of the Tri-Council for Nursing, U.S.

Division of Nursing, and U.S. Congressional staff, and examined 75 public documents and records as secondary sources of data. Her findings supported the conceptual categories and organization of the model and its ability to discern differences among political actors and corresponding policy stages. This grounding and depth of understanding would serve her well in her subsequent political journey, recognizing fully that in order to improve services or make substantial change for the health of constituents, one needs to know the underlying policy and politics that are successful. Over these years, she became active with the Democratic Party, working on political campaigns and serving to connect with nonprofit organizations and groups. She worked on community issues that were important and continue today: homelessness, housing, jobs, economic opportunity, and women’s and children’s issues, particularly infant mortality prevention through improving access for disadvantaged young mothers. She developed relationships in the community and in politics. She says that it was working with Mark Warner, who became Governor of Virginia and is currently a U.S. Senator, that she got her grassroots experience on the campaign trail together. She believed that she could enlighten and inform policymakers who do not understand nursing or health care. To most politicians, nurses are all the same and she was determined to be at the table to educate about Case Study 21 CASE STUDIES grew up in a rural household, she is a descendent of Delaware’s 15th governor, so it might have been her destiny to have a life in politics. She serves as the President of the Senate, a legislative body she has known for 8 years. As Lieutenant Governor she is proud to be able to influence the policy agenda in some roles and serve the state in her leadership role in moving systems issues such as health reform, workforce training, and mental illness. The political career of Bethany Hall-Long should be an inspiration for nurses who are dissatisfied with the status quo and passionate about making change to serve the needs of individuals who are disadvantaged. Her message to nursing students and professional nurses is that they should not leave policy making and governing to men in closed rooms anymore; they should seek out ways to influence and consider running for office. She attributes her passion and strength to her grandmother with an 8th grade (Hall-Long, 2007, 2012). She loves meeting people on the campaign trail and she believes that being a nurse gets her past the doorbell when going door to door in a race because people can instantly relate to you. She believes that her communication skills come directly from her nursing experience and her connection with the community. She encourages nurses to think beyond healthcare committees—to recognize that we are good at solving problems that may be outside our usual reach, and there is no limit to the list of public policy problems that we can tackle, including, but not limited to, childhood sports activities, palliative care, or opioid addiction, depending on our clinical expertise and interests. In January 2017, Bethany Hall-Long became the 26th Lieutenant Governor of Delaware. Her understanding of the policy process model that she developed in her dissertation continues to serve her well, and she notes that, although she Compiled from State of Delaware general election official results. (November 7, 2000; November 5, 2002; November 2, 2004; November 7, 2006; November 4, 2008). Dover, DE: Delaware Commissioner of Elections.

TABLE 1-1 Chronology of Bethany Hall-Long Elections Year Campaign/Election Outcome 2000 Ran against Republican Representative incumbent Richard Cathcart for District 9 seat. Lost 2002 Redistricted to District 8; ran unopposed in Democratic primary and against Republican nominee William Hutchinson in general election. Won (60.7%) 2004 Ran unopposed for Democratic primary and in general election. Won 2006 Ran unopposed for Democratic primary; ran against Republican nominee Edward Colaprete in general election. Won (77.0%) 2008 Ran unopposed for District 10 Senate seat; ran against Republican nominee James Weldin in general election. Won (64.9%) 2012 Incumbent; ran unopposed for Senate seat; ran unopposed in general election. Won 2016 Ran against Republican La Mar Gunn in Lieutenant Governor race. Won (59.4%) 22 Chapter 1 Nursing’s History of Advocacy and Action CASE STUDIES backgrounds that help them seek a public service life? 3. How can a political career unfold synergistically with a nurse’s ambition to run for political office? 4. Why is “running for office” described by politicians as a challenging personal experience? References Hall-Long, B. (2007). Vignette: farmgirl, nurse and legislator: My journey to the Delaware General Assembly. In D. J. Mason, J. K. Leavitt, & M. W. Chaffee (Eds.), Policy and politics in nursing and health care (5th ed, pp. 720–723). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders. Hall-Long, B. (2012). Chapter 17: Taking action: nurse, educator and legislator: My journey to the Delaware General Assembly. In D. J. Mason, J. K. Leavitt, & M. W. Chaffee (Eds.), Policy and politics in nursing and health care (6th ed, pp. 579–582). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders. Hall-Long, B. (1993). A policy process model: Analysis of the Nurse Education Act of 1991–1992. Dissertation at George Mason University, Fairfax, VA. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Personal interview: Bethany Hall-Long. (February 20, 2017). education who vociferously advocated that women should be well educated. Lt. Governor Hall-Long’s advice to those with aspirations to impact “the many” is to get prepared, study the policy process, and become experienced in ways to communicate with all types of stakeholders on the issues, from classrooms to boardrooms to community involvement. Volunteer and do not be intimidated. This public servant, from rural roots to a nursing graduate education that includes a PhD, brought her passion for people and her skills in community nursing to the State House in Delaware, second to Governor Carney, and still has gas in the tank to go farther. Her career story should inspire other nurses—who she claims already have the skill set and knowledge to work with people—to pursue public service in the political arena so that the most vulnerable among us can be heard.

Case Study Questions 1. Which of Lt. Governor Hall-Long’s list of nursing accomplishments played a role in her journey in politics? 2. What knowledge and characteristics are natural components of nurses’ professional Case Study 23 CASE STUDIES © Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock Policy and Politics Explained Nancy Aries OBJECTIVES ■ Define policy (generally) and health policy (specifically). ■ Explain the role of the market and the government in framing policy. ■ Describe the policy-making process, including:

• Competing concepts of federalism that create the structure within which policy is determined • Opposing interests and their influence on policy outcomes • Policy formation and the policy making • Policy implementation and its ramification for future action ■ Identify different approaches to influence and shape policy and programmatic outcomes that can be used by healthcare advocates. OVERVIEW Nurses and other healthcare professionals must understand how the government, providers, insurers, and consumers interact in the health policy process. This chapter provides an overview of the essential cornerstones that drive the policy-making process and shape the organization and delivery of health care in the United States. By understanding the framework within which policy is made and the politics of policy making and program implementation, all healthcare professionals, regardless of where they perform their duties, will be better prepared to advocate for a healthcare system that best meets the population’s needs. 25 CHAPTER 2 ▸ Introduction The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as “Obamacare,” was signed into law in 2010. Since 2013, the number of Amer - icans without health insurances has dropped from 41  million to a low of 28.5  million, or 10.5% of the population (Kaiser Family Foundation [KFF], 2016). As a result, more people are accessing care, and health outcomes show improvement (Peter - son Center on Health Care and Kaiser Family Foundation [PCHC-KFF], 2017). Also, the rate of healthcare spending has slowed ( McMorrow & Holahan, 2016). Despite these successes, there is a tremendous divide in political opinion about the ACA. President Trump made the repeal of Obamacare a cornerstone of his political agenda.

As the U.S. Senate considered repealing and re - placing the law in July 2017, 50% of adults were favorable, and 44% were unfavorable (KFF, 2017).

How can facts lead to such divergent understand - ing of whether the legislation has been success - ful or not? It suggests significant disagreement in our understanding of the government’s role in helping to shape the organization, delivery, and financing of health care. This chapter explains the purpose of gov - ernment in the policy and policy-making pro - cess as a first step to providing the necessary tools to those who want to influence the organization and delivery of care. The first section of the chap - ter expands on the definition of policy as gov - ernment actions that advance the well-being of society and considers how policy shapes our ex - perience of the healthcare system. When health care works, it is often the result of policies that enable it to succeed. When there is a failure, it can also be the case that policies have created an environment in which it is difficult to operate. The second section of this chapter highlights the different ways government policy and pro - grams intervene in the organization and delivery of health services to assure greater social equity in the access to affordable and high-quality health care. The choice of tools is determined by the balance established between the market and the government in overseeing the organization of healthcare delivery. Although the United States operates under a mixed system, the market and the government each present a different set of opportunities and constraints for policymakers. The remaining sections start with an exam - ination of the changing concepts of federalism or the role of the federal versus state governments.

The federalist framework within which policy is constructed is essential as it determines under whose jurisdiction healthcare policy falls. Once the dynamism of this relation is clarified, the actual programmatic tools the government uses to achieve its goals is explored. The policy-making process is explained in the following section.

The groups that have a stake in the development of public policy and programs are reviewed, as are the issues about which they are most con - cerned. From there, the chapter explains the dif - ferential influence of interest groups and their ability to shape the decision-making process to achieve what they perceive to be more favorable outcomes. This chapter does not explain legisla - tive procedures; that is better left to a civics text.

Rather, this chapter explains the points at which decisions are made and the political dynamics of decision making. The final section brings the discussion back to the nurses and health - care professionals for whom this text is written.

A better understanding of policy helps explain the experiences of those seeking and providing health care. It also provides a framework for un - derstanding how healthcare professionals can be more effective players within the policy-making process and have greater influence as a result.

▸ Policy Defined:

A Framework for Government Action Policy in the broadest sense is the manifestation of ideology or belief systems concerning pub - lic purpose (Weissert & Weissert, 2012). Public purpose refers to actions that benefit the popu - lation as a whole. Public policy, the term used to describe government action, is typically divided 26 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained into three areas: foreign policy, economic policy, and social policy (Lowi & Ginsberg, 1998). The objective of foreign policy is to defend national sovereignty. Economic policy is designed to pro - mote and regulate markets. Foreign and economic policy both seek to promote the political and eco - nomic well-being of American society, but policies in these areas do not have equal impact on all sec - tors of society. Some groups may benefit, whereas others might suffer undue consequences. For ex - ample, the North American Free Trade Agree - ment benefited the overall economy, but many Americans who held manufacturing jobs were laid off as production moved from the United States to countries with lower production costs.

Social policy often becomes the means by which these unintended consequences are addressed.

Through government actions, the provision of the basic necessities—food, shelter, health care, and education—are assured ( Midgley & Livermore, 2008). Social policy, therefore, is redistributive by its very nature. Its goal is to advance social equity. Health policy exists within the larger realm of social policy. Because policy is rooted in social values and ideologies, the discussion of health policy begins with the recognition of the val - ues and ideologies upon which the organization of the healthcare system is based. The historic course of American health policy is best de - scribed regarding shifting beliefs about access to care. Sometimes we stridently pursue health care as a right and look for ways to make ser - vices more readily available. Sometimes we treat health care as a privilege and look to individu - als to take responsibility for their care (Knowles, 1977). These competing values (i.e., a right ver - sus a privilege) are simultaneously and contin - ually at work. The assumed trajectory has been towards redistributive justice, but that is cur - rently under critical scrutiny. Until the Great Depression, ethnic and reli - gious communities assumed primary responsi - bility for providing social and economic support to persons in need of assistance. That responsi - bility shifted to the federal government in the 1930s (Kernell & Jacobson, 2006). The Social Se - curity Act of 1935 included economic support for the elderly, financial and social support for poor children, and limited health care for moth - ers and children. Its goals were further advanced by President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty, whose healthcare initiatives included Medicare and Medicaid. Medicare, which covers practically all Americans older than age 65, was deemed a right. It is a universal entitlement because it makes health services available to a defined population regardless of ability to pay. Such programs tend to be expensive because they are all inclusive, but they also tend to have broad political support because everyone can expect to receive the pro - gram’s benefits (Brown & Sparer, 2003). In con - trast, Medicaid makes health benefits available to distinct groups of low-income persons, which initially included families receiving public assis - tance, the disabled, and some older persons. States determine the specific eligibility cutoff as well as covered services. Medicaid is labeled a selective program because of the limits on eligibility. A re - sult is that it enjoys less political support. First, it serves needy populations whose claim to services is often considered questionable, and second, its level of service can be greater and less expensive than the services received by persons whose in - comes are slightly above the cutoff. Passage of the ACA represented the next ma - jor effort to expand access to affordable health care. It was passed in response to the rising num - ber of uninsured that resulted in part from rap - idly increasing healthcare costs that led to high out-of-pocket costs for individual policies as well as deductibles and coinsurance. The goal of en - suring that all Americans had access to afford - able health insurance is difficult to achieve given differing ideas about rights and privileges. The ACA settled on a plan that combined expanded access to Medicaid and a combination of sub - sidies for individuals up to 200% of the federal poverty level and tax credits for individuals up to 400% of the federal poverty level. Although the ACA made health insurance more afford - able to a large number of individuals, a third of individuals whose family incomes were greater than 200% of poverty reported that health insur - ance remained out of reach financially (Collins, Policy Defined: A Framework for Government Action 27 Marriott entered the senior housing market in response to this demand. This market-based solution, however, is limited to elderly consum - ers with sufficient purchasing power to afford Marriott’s products. For others, a government solution may be needed. Business can also in - fluence consumer healthcare market behavior.

The direct marketing of pharmaceuticals through television, print, and electronic advertising is in - tended to inform and direct consumers towards possible remedies for their health conditions. As these two examples make clear, a fun - damental problem with market-based solutions is their inability to respond when affordability determines what can be purchased. Those who cannot afford essential goods and services must do without. However, what about services that ensure individual welfare, such as lifesaving, but expensive, surgery? In these cases, the market is almost always inadequate. It fails to assure dis - tributive justice because it is premised on the unrealistic assumption that the transaction is an exchange among equals. Such an exchange is not possible in a society with an unequal dis - tribution of income (Arrow, 1963). These are the situations where government intervenes (Stone, 2012). The government’s role is necessitated by this fundamental tension be - tween the economic organization of the produc - tion and the distribution of goods and services and the social value of distributive justice. The market, left alone, tends to pull in the direction of economic inequality, but political beliefs de - mand a counterbalance regarding the distribution of rights and opportunities. The government be - comes the counterbalance for persons who can - not provide for themselves through the market exchange of goods and services (Arrow, 1974).

Through its policies and programs, the govern - ment provides for those who cannot fully par - ticipate in the market. It is this mechanism by which a society seeks to achieve greater equal - ity. Its policies and programs are redistributive, which means that its actions are intended to benefit those who cannot care for themselves or may suffer losses given their inability to pur - chase needed goods and services in the market. Gunja, Doty, & Beutel, 2017). The challenge posed by cutoffs is that the ACA has been nei - ther as successful as those who called for greater government intervention anticipated nor as costly as those who called for no government intervention suggested.

Markets versus Government The premise of direct governmental respon - sibility for the care of dependent populations, settled during The New Deal launched by Presi - dent Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933, has been re - opened after eight decades. Rather than looking to government to secure social welfare, there is a growing desire in some quarters for govern - ment to retreat from the role of social provider of last resort. This call for smaller government is rationalized by a belief that government re - stricts freedom and the market is capable of meeting individual needs. The terms market and government are shorthand expressions that describe the two ways in which society conducts its business.

Market means reliance on generally voluntary exchanges between private parties. Sometimes these exchanges are mandated and regulated by the government, as in the case of mandatory immunization for school children. Government means reliance on the direct provision of a ser - vice by government employees, as in the case of Veterans Affairs hospitals. It is not uncommon to use a combination of markets and govern - ment, as in the case of Medicare and Medicaid, where the government pays private providers to care for the elderly and poor. Most goods and services, including health care, are acquired through the market. The un - derlying reliance on the market as the arbiter of who gets and who does not get is based on a be - lief that market outcomes best serve individuals and, by extension, enhance the collective good.

Consider the housing market’s response to an aging population’s need for supportive services.

As the number of persons looking for housing alternatives not readily available in single-family or multiunit dwellings grew, companies such as 28 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained brought this contradiction between the states’ re - sponsibility for the public’s welfare and resources of the federal government to provide for the pub - lic’s welfare into sharp focus. States did not have the financial capability to protect the well-being of their citizens because they had limited ability to raise funds through taxation or deficit financ - ing. One result was a shift from a system of dual federalism to a system of cooperative federalism (Kernell & Jacobson, 2006). The federal govern - ment began to play an essential role in creating and funding social programs. Using grants-in- aid programs, Congress appropriated money to state and local governments with the condition that the money be spent for the particular pur - poses defined by Congress. The Maternal and Child Health Service, whose goal was to improve the health of low-income mothers and children, is such a grants-in-aid program. From a policy perspective, cooperative federalism is necessary because Congress set national goals and guided state activity in the realm of social policy. Again, it is this basis on which the current debate about Obamacare is premised (Krugman, 2017).

Federalism The various concepts of responsibility for health policy are also tied to the American federalist system of government (Bovbjerg, Wiener, & Housman, 2003). When the nation was founded, the states ceded certain responsibilities to the fed - eral government but retained others for them - selves. According to the framers of the U.S.

Constitution, the central government has express powers to levy taxes, declare war, and oversee in - terstate commerce. All power not expressly del - egated to the federal government falls under the jurisdiction of the states. Also, within the fed - eral government, there is a separation of pow - ers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. This further constrains the power of the national government by dividing the gov - ernment against itself. Finally, the Constitution limits both the federal and state governments by protecting individual rights that cannot be de - nied except through extraordinary procedures. Federalism refers to this dual system of state and federal governance, which limits the juris - diction of the federal government. This system provides the context in which the patchwork pattern of health policy exists. Although there is a strong national government, the states were initially more important than the federal gov - ernment in virtually all policies governing the lives of Americans, such as economic regulation, public health, and education. When President Franklin Pierce vetoed a law setting aside millions of acres of federal land to benefit the mentally ill, he reasoned that mental health was a state, not a federal, responsibility (Rothman, 1971). Despite individual welfare being defined as a state responsibility, there has been a constant expansion of federal power in this area since the Civil War. While the Constitution gave responsi - bility for individual welfare to the states, the Con - stitution gave the federal government authority to raise taxes for common defense and general wel - fare. The dire need caused by the Great Depression Courtesy of the Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, preproduction number ppmsca 09733. Policy Defined: A Framework for Government Action 29 similar needs being passed at the federal, state, and local levels. Examples of such service gaps and duplication are easily recognized by those who serve older persons. An individual seek - ing long-term care is confronted with myriad programs, including Medicare and Medicaid as well as social service block grants developed un - der both the Social Security Act and the Older Americans Act, and state-initiated programs. In - dividuals must navigate this maze of programs to determine their eligibility for services, while providers must integrate the various funding streams to provide coordinated and compre - hensive services where alignment does not nec - essarily exist. Fragmentation also impacts the ability to create a program of national health insur - ance. Given the dual regulatory system gov - erning health insurance, neither the states nor the federal government could easily mandate employers to offer health benefits because nei - ther governing body has regulatory authority over all businesses in a particular area (Mari - ner, 1996). The ACA amended the federal law to require employers of 50 or more persons to provide health insurance or pay the penalty. The ACA also mandated individuals not covered by the employer mandate to purchase health in - surance. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the individual mandate in June 2012 as well as the penalty under the fed - eral government’s power to collect taxes (Jost, 2012). However, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), in response to the Trump administration’s effort to reduce the burden of the ACA, is not enforcing collection of the individual penalty.

This revenue is used to support the Medicaid expansion and is essential to the financial via - bility of the ACA (Pear, 2017). The loss of rev - enue will further fragment access to services.

Governmental Intervention The government has several tools at its disposal to intervene when the market cannot adequately address a problem (Stone, 2012). Among these are taxation, service provision, and regulation. The federal government assumed an even larger role regarding shaping and funding so - cial welfare programs starting in the 1960s. The expansion of federal authority was in part a re - sponse to civil rights advocates who demanded greater regulation of state implementation of federal programs to achieve racial and social equality. The administration used the regula - tory process to impose national standards on the states (Conlan, 2006). In addition, the federal government created categorical programs that funded community-based providers, bypassing state governments (Davis & Schoen, 1978). The Office of Economic Opportunity’s community health center program is an example of such a categorically funded program. In the late 20th century there was one more shift in the relationship between the federal gov - ernment and the states. Starting with President Nixon, and affirmed during Reagan’s presidency, the push was to return authority to the states.

Initially called the new federalism , it involves the devolution of authority to the states to define the parameters of federally funded social welfare programs (Anton, 1997). The expressed goal is to enable states to accommodate their unique needs better. This is not possible when the fed - eral government is perceived as imposing a one- size-fits-all approach to social programs. Block grants became the mechanism by which greater discretion was given to the states to shape so - cial welfare programs. The block grants essen - tially combine funding from several grant-in-aid programs and allow states to determine how the money will be spent to achieve broad program - matic goals. While early in the Trump presi - dency, the intent is to both shift power back to the states and make government smaller. The varied proposals for replacing the ACA are all premised on massive federal cuts that involve the elimination of the Medicaid expansion, and the devolution of authority to the states to ad - dress the health needs of its citizens. Federalism results in a fragmented system of governance (Steinmo & Watts, 1995). One consequence is the fragmentation and dupli - cation of services arising from laws addressing 30 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained with nonteaching hospitals given the additional costs incurred for resident and faculty salaries and the additional resources used for patients seen by residents. As a result, Medicare funds residents’ salaries, thus subsidizing the hospitals where they train (Institute of Medicine, 2014).

Another example is the orphan drug program.

The government subsidizes pharmaceutical com - panies to research drugs that are used by a small number of persons and are therefore not prof - itable to develop and produce. Through these types of programs, the government encourages program expansion in areas that are not other - wise profitable (McCaughan, 2017). A third programmatic tool is government regulation of the market. Regulations are legal restrictions aimed to produce outcomes that otherwise might not occur. Examples of regu - lation include the licensure of physicians and other healthcare professionals (Grumbach, 2002). These regulations were adopted in the early 20th century as a way to protect the public from unqualified practitioners. Through a series of educational and practice requirements and a series of examinations, states determine who can and cannot provide medical and healthcare services. Another example of government regu - lation is state-mandated nursing-to-patient ra - tios for hospital-based care (Conway, Konetzka, Zhu, Volpp, & Sochal, 2008). These regulations are designed to protect patients by maintaining minimum staffing levels at all times.

▸ The Policy-Making Process The policy process is often described in rational terms as a step-by-step series of decisions and actions that lead to a reasonable outcome. The process begins with agenda setting and contin - ues through policy formulation and adoption, policy implementation, evaluation, and reevalu - ation (Kingdon, 1995). While the process can be broken down into a number of discrete events, the complexity or variance of what occurs is Taxation is often considered the means by which government raises money to support its spend - ing and influence behavior. Many states tax the sale of cigarettes to influence cigarette use (DeCicca, Kenkel, Mathios, Shin, & Lim, 2008).

Higher cigarette taxes have resulted in lower rates of consumption. Medicare Part A, which covers hospital care, is financed by payroll taxes paid by employers and employees. The ACA is funded through multiple sources of taxation, in - cluding the extension of the Medicare payroll tax on high earners and a tax on unearned in - come from taxable interests and dividends, for example. Current bills to repeal the ACA are es - timated to result in tax cuts of over $50,000 to persons earning more than $1  million dollars (Huang & Van De Water, 2017). Another tool is government support of ser - vice provision. In some cases, the government is the actual provider of services. Public hospitals were locally financed institutions organized to serve persons who cannot afford care. The Vet - erans Health Administration is a comprehensive healthcare system supported by the federal gov - ernment for individuals with medical problems resulting from service-related injuries after dis - charge from the service. Alternatively, the gov - ernment can purchase services from the private sector. Medicaid is an example of such a program.

Medicaid enrollees seek services from approved providers whose bills are paid by a combination of state and federal funds. Such spending is de - signed to increase access to the market for per - sons with limited income. The government can also produce and purchase services. This is the case with biomedical research. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has a large biomed - ical research complex that supports numerous researchers. Also, the NIH funds independent researchers at universities and research labora - tories across the country. The purchase of services may also take an indirect form whereby the government subsi - dizes sellers to participate in markets that might not be competitive based on price. For example, medical education is extremely costly. Hospitals that train physicians cannot compete on price The Policy-Making Process 31 these interests are organized, their policy per - spective, and the influence they wield in shaping what policy is adopted at any particular point in time. In the following section, the primary stakeholders or interest groups in the healthcare arena are identified as well as the changing power of these groups to influence policy outcomes. The American public’s health and well-being is the focus of health policy, but Americans do not speak with a single voice. There is tre - mendous variation in health status by age, socioeconomic status, and racial and ethnic background. As a result, many different organi - zations advocate on the public’s behalf. In each case, they are concerned with enabling the pop - ulation groups they represent to access services that would improve the quality of their lives, including a greater voice in the decisions that affect their health (Schneider, 1998). They want to become active participants in their care. Some organizations support better treatment modali - ties and financing for discrete services, such as the American Cancer Association, the Ameri - can Lung Association, and the National Mental Health Association. Others represent the needs of population-based groups. The largest groups active in policy making represent women, older persons, the disabled, the poor, and racial and ethnic minorities. Typically, the public’s first point of contact with the healthcare system is when they seek services. The organization and delivery of ser - vices can broadly be categorized in terms of two groups: clinicians and the organizations where they work. Their interests lie with the nature of services provided and how well or poorly they are organized and delivered. On the provider side, one can speak about physicians, nurses, and other practitioners and technicians. On the in - stitutional side, there are hospitals and nursing homes, and community-based providers such as community health centers. These groups do not speak with a single policy voice as their per - spectives differ. Historically, the technical expertise of physi - cians justified their control over the organization essential to understand that it may be possible to rationally explain how decisions were made at any point of the cycle, but not their content.

There may be agreement as to the problem. For example, the problems in the healthcare system are generally described regarding the number of uninsured individuals, the high cost of health care that limits access, or the uneven quality of care. However, the agreement stops there. The attribution of causation and the presentation of solutions reflect the diversity of ideas held by the multiple stakeholders; each is attempting to de - fine the problem and desired outcomes based on what they deem as “best.” This means there is no objective best an - swer. There is typically a range of competing best answers depending on the perspective from which one views the problem. “Best” is thus an important but always-loaded term be - cause the process is a political one. At each twist and turn in the policy processes, best is deter - mined by the stakeholders that hold the great - est sway over the decisions that will be made.

The government’s role typically becomes one of mediation between these interests as it formu - lates, creates, and implements policies and pro - grams that aim to achieve broader social goals.

Interest Groups in the Health Field The healthcare field is composed of many play - ers, both inside and outside government. Be - cause health and health care are fundamental to our well-being, it is a sphere of activity in which everyone has a vested interest. While it is possible to speak about the public’s interest, interest groups typically refer to people and or - ganizations with the most immediate stake in a problem and its resolution (Stone, 2012). These groups are known and identifiable. They repre - sent multiple interests, and each one is trying to influence the direction of government pol - icy. The challenge for someone interested in the policy-making process is to understand how 32 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained The business community, for example, is the prime purchaser of health care. They are in - terested in controlling what they spend on employee health benefits while providing a package of service that meets employees’ needs.

There is a plethora of organizations that rep - resent business interests, including the U.S.

Chamber of Commerce, which advocates on behalf of small businesses. The business sec - tor typically works in conjunction with insur - ance companies that are represented by the Health Insurance Association of America. The federal and state governments are also major purchasers of services. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) admin - isters federal health programs. The National Governors Association represents the inter - ests of state governments. The role of the medical supply industry in health policy decisions is expanding as tech - nology plays a greater role in the provision of health care and comprises a growing percent - age of healthcare spending. The pharmaceutical industry, which is represented by the Pharma - ceutical Research and Manufacturers of Amer - ica (PhRMA), is the fastest growing part of this sector. The American healthcare system is known for its technological know-how and the interests of these companies, represented by Advanced Medical Technology Association, must also be taken into account. Closely aligned with provider groups are knowledge producers who advance the science that underpins medical care and its organiza - tion and financing and establishes and maintains standards for medical practice. This includes universities and biomedical research organiza - tions. There are also think tanks that produce and disseminate healthcare research, such as the Institute of Medicine, the Kaiser Family Foun - dation, and the Commonwealth Fund. Last are organizations like the American Association of Medical Colleges and The Joint Commission that work to maintain the standards of med - ical practice through accreditation, examina - tions, and licensing. and delivery of medical services (Freidson, 1970; Starr, 1982). Their authority extended to state-supported control over the healthcare field.

Physicians determined the regulation of medi - cine through state licensing procedures. Physi - cians as a group are represented by the American Medical Association (AMA). The power of the AMA was legendary, but also circumspect. Phy - sicians actively advocated against programs, such as national health insurance, because they feared it would enable the government to reg - ulate the provision of health services and the physician–patient relationship. The AMA’s in - terest typically remains at the broadest level as they avoid specific policy issues when the ben - efit of their members can be at odds. As a result, the different medical specialties are represented by their organizations. The nursing profession’s interests diverge from those of physicians because they focus more on the process of care as opposed to cure (Glouberman & Mintzberg, 2001). However, like physicians, nurses are represented by multiple organizations, including the American Nurses Association, American Association of Colleges of Nursing, the National League for Nurses, and the Association of Nurse Executives. They often work jointly when addressing issues surround - ing health, health care, and nursing practice, but take independent positions on specific issues such as unionization. The same holds true for institutional providers. On the provider side, the American Hospital Association is the primary advocacy group for the hospital industry, but voluntary, public, and for- profit hospitals each have their own associations, as do academic health centers. Their interests are often focused on how the financing of care can be structured to assure access for the populations they serve. Critical to the system are organizations that pay for health services. Each of these groups has a concern for the well-being of the popu - lation, but each one also has a stake in devel - oping financing and reimbursement methods that are responsive to their particular concerns. The Policy-Making Process 33 Democratic majority in the House and the Sen - ate that could assure passage of the ACA with or without partisan support. A similar scenario unfolded concerning repeal. Trump’s campaign to “make America great again” was directed at people who had not benefited from the eco - nomic recovery following the recession of 2008.

For many middle-income persons, the ACA re - sulted in higher health costs as a result of rising premiums and deductibles, or their decision to pay the penalty under the individual mandate.

With Republicans in control of both Congress and Senate, the executive branch assumed that repeal and replace would not be difficult to achieve. But the consensus on how to proceed was not there (Shabad, 2017).

Identifying the Direction of Policy Change Once a policy issue and its political framing become part of the public agenda, the relevant question becomes which alternative will have the greatest chance of succeeding. Typically, it is argued that the ideas and programs of inter - est groups with the greatest access to policymak - ers have the greatest chance of success, while others struggle to be heard (Schnattschneider, 1960; Bachrach & Baratz, 1962). However, the changing parameters of healthcare reform, as supported by the Obama and Trump administra - tions, demonstrate that the influence of health - care interest groups is not equal or fixed. Power can become realigned over time, as can the im - portance of different stakeholders. The changing balance of power must be seen as part of the ongoing nature of the policy process. There is rarely a situation where poli - cymakers start with a clean slate. Rather, they are responding to the conditions resulting from existing policy and programs (Weible, 2018).

Sometimes policy implementation achieves its goals and furthers social equity, but at times there can be unintended consequences that worsen the outcomes for many people. It is this ten - sion over who benefits and who is left behind Politics of Decision Making In most cases, the social problems addressed by the government have been known and part of the national dialogue for many years. The gov - ernment, however, does not assume an activist stance on all issues at all times. As a result, there are periods of relative stasis when the govern - ment is not called upon to play a highly inter - ventionist role. Rather, it makes incremental changes to improve upon existing policy or ad - vance programs that are limited in scope and whose impacts are understood (Baumgartner, Jones, & Mortensen, 2018). However, the situ - ation can change, and there can be a window of opportunity that brings an issue to the forefront ( Herweg, Zahariadis, & Zohlnhofer, 2018). This can result in large-scale departures from the past. There are different types of events that ele - vate an issue at a particular point in time (Peter - son, 1993). The government is often responsive to the external environment such as a natural disaster like Hurricane Katrina or, more re - cently, Hurricane Harvey. Many public health issues that had been ignored before the hurri - cane, such as emergency preparedness, were sud - denly perceived as needing immediate action (Fee & Brown, 2002). Interest groups also have the tools to advance their agendas. The series of lawsuits brought against tobacco companies in the 1990s, which led them to seek liability pro - tection in exchange for greater regulation, is an example of the use of the legal system (Pertschuk, 2001). Presidents can also advance a policy is - sue. Most recently, Presidents Clinton, Obama, and now Trump have made healthcare reform one of the central issues of their presidencies.

This overarching concern has dominated health policy making. These triggering events and their ability to shape the political agenda and policy options are heavily influenced by politics of the time (Kingdon, 1995). Obama’s campaign in 2008 was framed by the ideas of hope and change.

Given the crash of the financial markets, peo - ple were looking for some assurances about the economic well-being of the country. There was a 34 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained who benefited greatly from the expansion of health services were not looked to for the solution. Their medical expertise regarding the organization and delivery of care did not carry the same weight as the managerial expertise of systems administra - tors, including third-party payers who under - stood healthcare financing. These groups were in a better position to control costs by creating financial incentives to influence physician prac - tice patterns (Weissert & Weissert, 2012). The government took the lead in controlling hospi - tal costs when it changed Medicare reimburse - ment and incentivized the growth of managed care. This resulted in the consolidation of health providers under the control of hospitals and large multispecialty group practices and, ultimately, a rebalancing of power between physicians and in - stitutional providers and payers of care in deter - mining how health care would be organized and delivered (Relman, 1980; Starr, 2017). Like Medicare and Medicaid, the ACA can be understood as both an extension and disruption of existing policies and programs. By the time the ACA was passed, the number of uninsured was approaching one-fifth of the population (KFF, 2016). In addition, healthcare spending contin - ued to rise and accounted for over 17% of GDP.

The goal of the ACA was to expand access and contain costs. The ACA used private insurance markets to make individual health insurance more widely available by providing subsidies or tax credits to persons with incomes between 138% and 400% of poverty. The fundamental change was the Medicaid expansion. Under the ACA, Medicaid was reconceived as a universal insur - ance program for all people with incomes below 138% of poverty (Nardin, Zallman, McCormick, Woolhandler, & Himmelstein, 2013). Although the Supreme Court made the expansion optional, at this time, over 20% of the population is insured by Medicaid (KFF, 2017). The Republican effort to repeal the ACA is aimed at returning the organization, delivery, and financing of health care to the market (Jost, 2017). Rather than looking to government to provide a public benefit, the Republican bills to repeal and replace the ACA use a system of tax that sets up the political conditions for change and the ability of different actors to influence the situation. The passage of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965 marked the first time the federal gov - ernment provided health insurance for anyone other than federal employees and the military.

The legislation garnered widespread support be - cause it was responsive to the dominant health - care interest groups. The hospitals backed Part A because charges would be determined retro - spectively based on actual costs, and they would receive reimbursement for persons who previ - ously had trouble paying for hospital care. Phy - sicians and the AMA, as well as the Republicans, supported Part B because it was voluntary and did not undermine the doctor–patient relation - ship by creating a broader precedent for the gov - ernment provision of care. Insurance companies supported Medicare because they would be re - sponsible for claims administration. For Demo - crats, Medicare was a social insurance program that set a precedent for government-provided universal coverage (Marmor, 1973). These pro - grams were built around the interests of the most influential stakeholders, but they also broke new ground in making health care more widely af - fordable and, therefore, accessible. What was unforeseen at the time Medicare and Medicaid were passed was that the imple - mentation of these programs would shift the balance of power away from physicians and to - wards institutions whose interests centered on the financing of health care (Morone, 1995). Fol - lowing implementation of Medicare and Med - icaid, healthcare costs began to rapidly increase due to expanded access to medical care and the ways payments were calculated. Healthcare ex - penditures almost doubled from 5.6% of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 1965 when the legislation was passed to 10.1% by 1983 when the government implemented a revised hospi - tal payment system from one based on actual costs to one based on fixed costs (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2016). The policy issue was recast from one of ac - cess to one of cost containment. Physician groups The Policy-Making Process 35 already been negotiated among all of the inter - ested stakeholders during the process of policy formation. These negotiations continue right up until the moment that the proposed legislation comes under review by Congress and is written into law (Weissert & Weissert, 2012). Govern - ment seeks to advance broader social interests while being responsive to vested power in the healthcare industry that demands concessions in the programs being advanced. Medicare created a managed care pro - gram, Part C, that is controlled by managed care companies to exist alongside traditional Medicare that is controlled by the health pro - viders. Until recently, Part C costs exceeded those of traditional Medicare, but the govern - ment subsidized the difference (Biles, Casillas, & Guterman, 2016). Likewise, Medicare Part D, the Prescription Drug Plan, does not allow the government to use its buying power to negoti - ate pharmaceutical prices. Passage of the ACA also required the support of powerful interest groups, such as the hospital sector, insurance in - dustry, and small businesses. Despite opposition, President Obama moved ahead in a relatively expeditious way. Their support was obtained by making concessions to large stakeholders.

The most significant was the elimination of the government-sponsored health insurance option (Oberlander, 2010). Legislation provides the broadest possible outline of a program. The specificity of the law determines the flexibility that the administration has in its implementation (Lowi, 1979). There are advantages and disadvantages to both choices.

A bill in which the details are clearly specified may encounter difficulty in Congress because groups may oppose the particulars and disre - gard the overarching goals, which was the case in Clinton’s health reform. A consensus can be more easily built around a law with broad goals and few details (Stone, 2012). In that case, deci - sions about implementation are left to the ad - ministering agencies. How an agency chooses to implement the program can have a tremendous influence on its  outcome (Jacobson & Wasserman, 1999; credits to ensure the affordability of health in - surance. Rather than requiring insurers to pro - vide a basic package of federally defined essential benefits, insurers can offer minimal coverage at lower costs. Rather than mandating that individ - uals have basic health coverage, Republicans as - sume that individuals can anticipate the levels of health insurance that would best meet their needs.

However, lower costs shift the financial risks and health outcome risks on to patients. This takes us back over four decades. As Kenneth Arrow (1974) pointed out in the early 1970s, the market does not work when there is an unequal distribution of income and the market goods are costly and essential to individual well-being. Health care now accounts for almost one-fifth of the economy (18% of GDP). Given that sizable portion of the economy, major institutional play - ers actively protect their positions when it comes to health policy. This can be seen in the amount of money being spent to influence legislators (OpenSecrets.org, n.d.). In 2016, the pharma - ceutical and health product industry spent over one-quarter of a billion dollars ($248,733,749) on lobbying. This was the most of any industry in the country. Pharmaceuticals were followed by insurance companies, which spent almost $153 billion. In eighth place was the hospital and nurs - ing home industry, whose combined spending was just under $100 million. The healthcare in - dustry also donated almost $200 million to par - ties and candidates in the 2015 to 2016 election cycle—51% to Democrats and 48% to Repub - licans. These industry groups would not spend such large sums if they were not looking to in - fluence impending health policy decisions in directions that furthered their economic inter - ests but were aligned with the underlying goals of access, cost, and quality.

Policy Adoption and Implementation Policy is enacted through the legislative process.

Elected officials decide the broad outlines of pol - icy when they enact laws, but they do not act in a vacuum. They act upon proposals that have 36 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained rise as much as 25%, most Republicans sup - ported repeal of the ACA. They considered the market for health care so distorted by govern - ment programs that repeal was the only way to wipe the slate clean and begin again (Ponnuru & Levin, 2013). Whether one agrees or not with the Republican “wipe the slate clean” policy ap - proach, it is up against a powerful real-world coalition of vested interests that are at best in - clined towards incremental change in an oth - erwise working system.

▸ What Is at Stake for Nurses and Other Health Professionals? Healthcare professionals and their patients ex - perience the impact of the implementation pro - cess on a daily basis. How patients are recruited to programs such as state insurance exchanges is determined by the regulations of these pro - grams. Which companies offer health plans, and the scope of these plans under the exchanges, are the result of program guidelines and the payment rates for physicians participating in accountable care organizations (ACOs). These are examples of how policy developed by federal or state legislatures and implemented by federal and state administering agencies are realized in the ways health care is provided and adminis - tered. Although their work is seemingly distant, their impact is immediate regarding access to quality, cost effective care. The work of nurses and other health pro - fessionals tends to be highly individualized. By interacting with patients, these individuals see the many problems that result from policy deci - sions made at a distance. They understand how physicians’ orientation toward care can overrule nurses’ orientation toward care (Glouberman & Mintzberg, 2001). They observe how the loss of healthcare insurance can result in patients de - ferring care, much to their detriment. They un - derstand that the pursuit of quality patient care Morone, 1995; Pressman & Wildavsky, 1973).

The leadership of the agency must be in accord with the program’s goals so it does not languish, and the personnel must have program expertise to implement it effectively (Peterson, 1993). Or - ganized interests that were instrumental through - out the legislative process play a comparable role during its implementation. They work with the administrative agencies to ensure that the appli - cation meets their interests by monitoring the process (Pressman & Wildavsky, 1973). The Obama administration nominated Don - ald Berwick to serve as Director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. He had played a significant role in the development of the ACA. The Trump administration appointed Tom Price as Secretary of HHS. A fierce oppo - nent of the ACA, his administration has begun to weaken enforcement of the individual mandate, impose work requirements on Medicaid recipi - ents, and limit outreach to the uninsured during open enrollment (Park & Sanger-Katz, 2017). Programs do not always achieve their stated goals. There are unintended consequences that result from any legislative act. The cyclical na - ture of the policy process becomes apparent.

The proposed solutions in one period set up the problems that need be addressed in the next.

One result of bringing all interested parties into the ACA is that the most recent (2017) efforts to repeal were not successful. Although there is widespread dissatisfaction with the ACA, the Republicans misread its meaning. The public was disappointed that the ACA had not con - trolled the cost of health care as promised. How - ever, they did not support repeal. They wanted Congress to address the unintended cost con - sequences of the ACA so the legislation would realize the level of protection it had promised (Jacobs & Mettler, 2017). Also, there was a no - ticeable absence of support from all interest groups (Leonhardt, 2017). Despite the noticeable lack of support, the Congressional Budget Office’s estimates that as many as 14 million persons might lose health in - surance in 2018, and estimates from the insur - ance industry that individual premiums could What Is at Stake for Nurses and Other Health Professionals? 37 expertise (Wynia, Kohorn, & Mitchell, 2012).

Nurses and other health professionals who took instruction from doctors for matters related to direct patient care are being recognized for their expertise. They have become strong advocates for interprofessional education and have even begun to seek professional status and the right to independent practice. Professional associations, such as those for physical therapists and nurse practitioners, are lobbying on a state-by-state basis to change licensing laws so these clinicians can practice independently and receive direct reimbursement for their services. Such laws recognize the shifting base of power within the health field through the creation of alternative centers of authority. By understanding the process and how it has shaped the organization and delivery of health care, it is possible to understand the terms of engagement. Since the 1990s, the market was assumed to bring greater efficiency to the or - ganization and delivery of health care. It is the failure of this approach that reinvigorates inter - est in its politics. We know that the problems of health costs, access, and quality have not been fully resolved. The critical challenge remains one of determining how health care should be organized and delivered to ensure the best pos - sible health outcomes for the population. De - termining what will be the trade-offs between access, costs, and quality will impact the situa - tion that nurses and other professionals confront every day. Nurses and other healthcare providers need to become one of the dominant voices in the policy-making and policy- implementation process for how the healthcare system will best meet the needs of the people it serves.

Discussion Questions 1. What are the limits of the market in the provision of health services? 2. Why does the federalist system of gov - ernment result in the fragmentation of healthcare delivery? 3. What makes policy alternatives political in nature? is dependent on their ability to engage and use nursing resources effectively, which will likely become more challenging as the nursing short - age persists and resources become increasingly limited (Rother & Lavizzo-Mourey, 2009).

© Samuel Perry/Shutterstock In many cases, these professionals become the patients’ advocates, but historically they have not played a major role in the initial develop - ment of the policies that have such a tremendous impact on their work and the lives of their patients.

Some have attributed this to heavy workloads.

Others have discussed the educational process that socializes nurses to distance themselves from politics. Still others speak about the difficulty nurses have had in asserting their professional authority when they find themselves up against dominant interests, such as physician groups, hospitals, and payers. Regardless of the cause, nurses and other health professionals are assert - ing a greater voice in the policy-making process (Clarke, Swider, & Bigley, 2013; Needleman & Hassmiller, 2009). Nurses and other health professionals are finding themselves with greater authority and are leading several policy-related discussions.

The healthcare labor force, which has been de - scribed as a pyramid with physicians at the apex directing all related medical practice, is chang - ing. As the provision of care becomes increas - ingly complex, team-based care is taking hold.

Physicians are working as collaborators with alternative practitioners with differing areas of 38 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained Conway, P. H., Konetzka, T. R., Zhu, J., Volpp, K. G., & Sochal, J. (2008). Nurse staffing ratios: Trends and policy implications for hospitalists and the safety net. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 3 (3), 193–199. Davis, K., & Schoen, C. (1978). Health and the war on poverty: A ten year appraisal . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. DeCicca, P., Kenkel, D., Mathios, A., Shin, Y. J., & Lim, J. Y. (2008). Youth smoking, cigarette prices, and anti-smoking sentiment. Health Economics, 17 , 733–749. Deloitte. (2014). The great consolidation: The potential for rapid consolidation of health systems. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us /Documents/life-sciences-health-care/us-lshc-great -consolidation-111214.pdf Fee, E., & Brown, T. M. (2002). The unfulfilled promise of public health: Déjà vu all over again. Health Affairs, 21(6), 31–43. Freidson, E. (1970). Profession of medicine: A study of the sociology of applied knowledge . New York, NY: Dodd, Mead. Glouberman, S., & Mintzberg, H. (2001). Managing the care of health and the cure of disease: Part I: Differentiation. Health Care Management Review, 26 (1), 56–69. Grumbach, K. (2002). Fighting hand to hand over physician workforce policy: The invisible hand of the market meets the heavy hand of government planning. Health Affairs, 32 (5), 13–27. Herweg, N., Zahariadis, N., & Zohlnhofer, R. (2018). The multiple streams framework: Foundations, refinements, and empirical applications. In C. M. Weible & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (4th ed., pp. 17–53). New York, NY: Westview Press. Huang, C-C, & Van De Water, P. N. (2016, December 15). Millionaires the big winners from repealing the Affordable Care Act, new data show. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities . Published online July 26, 2017. Institute of Medicine. (2014). Graduate medical education that meets the nation’s health needs . Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Jacobs, L. R., & Mettler, S. (2017, July 31). Outside of Washington, there is a new vital center in health care reform. Health Affairs Blog. Retrieved August 1, 2017 from http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/07/31/outside -of-washington-there-is-a-new-vital-center-in-health -care-reform/ Jacobson, P., & Wasserman, J. (1999). The implementation and enforcement of tobacco control laws: Policy implications for activists and the industry. Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, 24 , 567–598. Jost, T. S. (2012). The Affordable Care Act largely survives the Supreme Court’s scrutiny—but barely. Health Affairs, 31(8), 1659–1662. Jost, T. S. (2017). First steps of repeal, replace, and repair. Health Affairs , 36(3), 398–399. Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF). (2016, September 29). Key facts about the uninsured population. Menlo Park, 4. Why has the dominance of physicians given way to corporate interests? 5. Why are nurses and other health profes - sionals beginning to find themselves with greater stature in the health policy arena? References Anton, T. (1997). New federalism and intergovernmental fiscal relationships: The implications for health policy. Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law , 22(3), 691–720. Arrow, K. J. (1963). Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care. The American Economic Review, 53 (5), 941–974. Arrow, K. J. (1974). The limits of organization . New York, NY: W. W. Norton. Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. (1962). Two faces of power. American Political Science Review, 56 , 4632–4642. Baumgartner, F. R., Jones, B. D., & Mortensen, P. B. (2018). Punctuated equilibrium theory: Explaining stability and change in public policymaking. In C. M. Weible & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (4th ed., pp. 55–101). New York, NY: Westview Press. Biles, B., Casillas, G., & Guterman, S. (2016, January). Does Medicare Advantage cost less than traditional Medicare? The Commonwealth Fund Policy Brief. Retrieved from http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue -briefs/2016/jan/does-medicare-advantage-cost-less Bovbjerg, R., Wiener, J., & Housman, M. (2003). State and federal roles in health care: Rationales for allocating responsibilities. In J. Holahan, A. Weil, & J. Wiener (Eds.), Federalism and health policy (Vol. 3, pp. 25–51). Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press. Brown, L. D., & Sparer, M. S. (2003). Poor program’s progress: The unanticipated politics of Medicaid policy. Health Affairs, 22 (1), 31–44. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2016, December 6). National health expenditure data: Historical. Retrieved from https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems /Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpend Data/NationalHealthAccountsHistorical.html Clarke, P. N., Swider, S., & Bigley, M. B. (2013). Nursing leadership and health policy. Nursing Science Quarterly , 26(2), 136–142. Retrieved from https://doi .org/10.1177/0894318413477146 Collins, S. R., Gunja, M. Z., Doty, M. M., & Beutel S. (2017, February 1). How the Affordable Care Act has improved Americans’ ability to buy health insurance on their own. The Commonwealth Fund. Retrieved from http://www .commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2017 /feb/how-the-aca-has-improved-ability-to-buy-insurance Conlan, T. (2006). From cooperative to opportunistic federalism: Reflections on the half-century anniversary of the commission on intergovernmental relations. Public Administration Review, 66 , 663–676. 39 References -after-implementation-of-the-affordable-care-act-a -demograhic-and-geographic-analysis/ Needleman, J., & Hassmiller, S. (2009). The role of nurses in improving hospital quality and efficiency: Real-world results. Health Affairs, 28 (4), w625–w633. Oberlander, J. (2010). Long time coming: Why health reform finally passed. Health Affairs, 29 (6), 1112–1116. OpenSecrets.org. (n.d.). Lobbying spending database. Retrieved August 18, 2017 from https://www.opensecrets .org/lobby/top.php?showYear =2016&indexType =i Park, H., & Sanger-Katz, M. (2017, July 19). 3 things Trump is already doing to ‘Let Obamacare Implode.’ The New York Times . Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com /interactive/2017/07/19/us/what-trump-can-do-to-let -obamacare-fail.html Pear, Robert. (2017, July 3). Congress moves to stop I.R.S. from enforcing health law mandate. The New York Times . Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03 /us/politics/congress-moves-to-stop-irs-from-enforcing -health-law-mandate.html Pertschuk, M. (2001). Smoke in their eyes: Lessons in movement leadership from the tobacco wars . Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press. Peterson Center on Health Care and Kaiser Family Foundation (PCHC-KFF). (2017, July 26). How does health spending in the U.S. compare to other countries? Peterson-Kaiser Health System Tracker. Retrieved from http://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection /health-spending-u-s-compare-countries/ Peterson, M. A. (1993). Political influence in the 1990s: From iron triangles to policy networks. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 18 , 395–436. Ponnuru, R., & Levin, Y. (2013, November 13). Ponnuru and Levin: A conservative alternative to ObamaCare. The Wall Street Journal . Retrieved from https://www.wsj .com/articles/a-conservative-alternative-to-obamacarea -conservative-alternative-to-obamacare-1384382566?ns =prod/accounts-wsj Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. (1973). Implementation . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Relman, A. S. (1980). The new medical–industrial complex. New England Journal of Medicine, 303 , 963–970. Rother, J., & Lavizzo-Mourey, R. (2009). Addressing the nursing workforce: A critical element for health reform. Health Affairs, 28 (4), w620–w624. Rothman, D. J. (1971). The discovery of the asylum: Social order and disorder in the New Republic . Boston, MA: Little, Brown. Schnattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semisovereign people: A realist’s view of democracy in America . New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Schneider, C. E. (1998). The practice of autonomy: Patients, doctors, and medical decisions . New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Shabad, R. (2017, July 28). Why John McCain, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski bucked their party. CBS News. Retrieved July 31, 2017 from http://www.cbsnews. CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet /key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/ Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF). (2017, July 14). Kaiser Health tracking poll: The public’s views on the ACA. Menlo Park, CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.kff.org/interactive/kaiser -health-tracking-poll-the-publics-views-on-the-aca/ Kernell, S., & Jacobson, G. C. (2006). The logic of American politics (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press. Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies . New York, NY: Harper Collins College. Knowles, J. H. (1977). The responsibility of the individual. In J. H. Knowles (Ed.), Doing better and feeling worse: Health in the United States . Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Krugman, P. (2017, July 17). The healthcare debacle: The roles of ignorance and evil. The New York Times. Retrieved August 2, 2017 from https://krugman.blogs.nytimes .com/2017/07/17/the-healthcare-debacle-the-roles-of -ignorance-and-evil/ Leonhardt, D. (2017, July 27). Opinion | ‘Skinny’ cynicism on health care. The New York Times . Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/opinion/skinny -cynicism-on-health-care.html Lowi, T. (1979). The end of liberalism: Ideology, policy, and the crisis of public authority (2nd ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company. Lowi, T., & Ginsberg, B. (1998). American government (5th ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company. Mariner, W. (1996). State regulation of managed care and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. New England Journal of Medicine, 335 , 1986–1990. Marmor, T. (1973). The politics of Medicare . Chicago, IL: Aldine Press. McCaughan, M. (2017). Pricing orphan drugs. Health Affairs . Retrieved from http://www.healthaffairs.org /healthpolicybriefs/brief.php?brief_id =168 McMorrow, S., & Holahan, J. (2016, June 1). Implications of health spending growth slowdown on the Affordable Care Act. Princeton, NJ: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.rwjf.org/en/library /research/2016/06/the-widespread-slowdown-in-health -spending-growth-implications-f.html Midgley, J., & Livermore, M. (Eds.). (2008). The handbook of social policy . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Press. Morone, J. (1995). Elusive community: Democracy, deliberation, and the reconstruction of health policy. In M. Landy & M. Levin (Eds.). The new politics of public policy (pp. 180–204). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Nardin, R., Zallman, L., McCormick, D., Woolhandler, S., & Himmelstein, D. (2013). The uninsured after implemen-tation of the Affordable Care Act: A demographic and geographic analysis. Health Affairs Blog. Retrieved from http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2013/06/06/the-uninsured 40 Chapter 2 Policy and Politics Explained Weible, C. M. (2017). Introduction: The scope and focus of policy process research and theory. In C. M. Weible & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (4th ed., pp. 1–13). New York, NY: Westview Press. Weissert, W. G., & Weissert, C. S. (2012). Governing health: The politics of health policy (4th ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Wynia, M. K., Kohorn, I. V., & Mitchell, P. H. (2012). Challenges at the intersection of team-based and patient-centered health care: Insights from an IOM working group. JAMA , 308 (13), 1327–1328. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.12601 com/news/why-john-mccain-susan-collins-and-lisa-murkowski-bucked-their-party/ Starr, P. (1982 and 2017 edition). The social transformation of American medicine . New York, NY: Basic Books. Steinmo, S., & Watts, J. (1995). It’s the institutions, stupid! Why comprehensive national health insurance always fails in America. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 20 , 329–372. Stevens, R. (1971). American medicine in the public interest . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Stone, D. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (3rd ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company. 41 References © Anthony Krikorian/Shutterstock A Policy Toolkit for Healthcare Providers and Activists Roby Robertson and Donna Middaugh OBJECTIVES ■ Define the role of healthcare professionals in policy advocacy and politics. ■ Describe processes for becoming a policy advocate within one’s own organization, profession, and community. ■ Recognize the difference between expertise and internal and external advocacy in relation to stakeholders. ■ Describe benefits of using an interdisciplinary collaborative approach in policy advocacy. ■ Apply the concepts of health policy to case study vignettes. ■ Develop one’s own toolkit for becoming a health policy advocate. OVERVIEW What is the role of healthcare professionals in the political process? Given the range of issues, where does the political process begin and end? Healthcare policy is centered around the notion that all healthcare providers require a fundamental understanding of the healthcare system that is not limited to the knowledge required to practice their discipline. No longer can healthcare professionals be prepared solely for clinical practice. They must ready themselves to deal with the economic, political, and policy dimensions of health care because the services they provide are the outcome of these dynamics. 43 CHAPTER 3 ▸ Introduction Professional nurses and other allied health prac - titioners must have a seat at the policy table, but they must also understand the perspectives of their colleagues; therefore, we have used contrib - utors from outside of nursing, including allied health professionals, activists, politicians, econ - omists, and policy analysts who understand the forces of health care in the United States. The rationale behind an interdisciplinary approach is that no one person has the right solution to the challenges confronting health care in the U.S. These challenges include high costs, lim - ited access, medical errors, variable quality, ad - ministrative inefficiencies, and a lack of care coordination. It is not surprising that the healthcare sys - tem is under serious stress and that a host of ac - tors, both within and beyond the system, have myriad solutions to the problem. This chapter offers current and future healthcare practitioners who are committed to reducing health dispar - ities and achieving healthcare equality insight into how clinical practice is derived from reg - ulations and laws that are based on public pol - icy and politics. It is important to note that politics is both necessary and critical to making changes, whether we are discussing system-level reforms (e.g., na - tional health insurance reform) or a local hospi - tal improving health data access (e.g., electronic medical records). This chapter provides healthcare practi - tioners a toolkit, or a working model, of how to “do” policy advocacy within and beyond our organizational lines. The toolkit is based on the ability to answers these questions: What is the health professional’s role in policy advocacy and politics? How is that role changing in the midst of organizational evolution where strict bureau - cratic control is being replaced with more flex - ible models of collaborative decision making across public, private, and nonprofit arenas? In addition, this chapter examines two broad components of policy change: the influence and power of stakeholders or constituencies, and the power of expertise. Although these arenas over - lap, here we examine them separately to portray their specific roles more accurately. What, then, is the healthcare practitioner’s role in the political process? Where does that process take place? In this chapter we examine the dynamics of the process. Many traditional views define the political process as external only, primarily defined at the policy-making levels of government or boards and commis - sions; therefore, the argument follows that pro - fessionals below senior-level decision makers are primarily reactive—that is, they respond to proposals from up the line and must calculate how to implement changes that others have im - posed on them. In public administration this has tradition - ally been defined as a politics/administration di - chotomy; that is, political decisions are made by higher ups, and the administrator finds a way to carry out those decisions. That dichotomy, however, is not reflective of reality because in actual decision making and in the practicali - ties of day-to-day management, policy shaping and implementation within a given organiza - tion are the result of interactions at all levels of the organization. The administrators are trying to influence policy outcomes, like those in the policy arena. It is time that healthcare practi - tioners do the same. There is another reason why practitioners must develop a political/policy toolkit. Politics and policy making are not a function only of the external environment of the organization.

In fact, the most sophisticated and nuanced el - ements of such a policy/political role can also be found in the internal environment of the or - ganization. Again, practitioners can play a role in influencing these outcomes. Imagine the following scenario: Your se - nior executive pulls you aside one day and says, “Do you know that proposal you’ve wanted to push forward about how we reallocate the staff here in the organization? Well, why don’t you put together the budget, a time line, and what we need to do to move this forward in the next budget cycle?” You have been anxious to do so 44 Chapter 3 A Policy Toolkit for Healthcare Providers and Activists for some time, and you stay in the office every evening detailing the proposal (with fancy pie charts, a time line, personnel requirements, etc.), and you turn it in to your executive. A week goes by, and then two, then three. You are getting anxious; to start some of the time line issues you would need to get rolling soon, but you’ve heard nothing. You mention it to the executive and she nods, looks solemn, and asks you back into the office. She sits on the edge of the desk (not behind the desk, not a good sign) and pulls out your proposal. You can see it has lots of red marks throughout. The executive shakes her head and says, “Well it re - ally is a great idea; it really is the way to go in the future, but I ran it up the line, and well, you know, politics got in the way. It’s just not going to fly!” She hands back your proposal. You re - turn to your office and open the file cabinet of other projects that didn’t get off the ground, and you think, politics! Why didn’t it fly? What could have hap - pened? Senior managers did not like the pro - posal? It competed with other proposed changes that could fly. What kept yours from flying? Per - haps it was because you had not accounted for the politics of your own organization. Politics exist at the organizational level, not just at the policy-making level, and you did not take those considerations into account. Thus, our approach in this chapter suggests that the politics of the environment are both external and internal. In all areas of leadership and management, within the healthcare policy arena and beyond, the shift to managing in a more collaborative arena (vs. a more bureaucratic one) also re - quires particular attention to utilizing political tools to operate effectively. Instead of perceiv - ing “politics” as a control function (zero sum winning and losing), the effective leader in the policy advocacy world must see the political environment as an ongoing process shaped by short-term collaborative relationships, which may exist for temporary networks and dissolve as the process continues to evolve. In nursing leadership and administration, much of the theoretical and conceptual research refers to such models as shared governance mod - els. As early as 1988, research focused on how to better integrate such efforts into effective practice (Allen, Calkin, & Peterson, 1988). Yet, even as late as 2004, a careful review of the lit - erature of shared governance had yielded con - siderable anecdotal support for its importance, but not much empirical evidence of its effec - tiveness (Anthony, 2004). The reality is that more and more manage - ment functions in health care require greater assimilation of collaborative models to the ef - fective practice of administration. We suggest that the key to gaining more effective use of the policy environment, both inside and outside the organization, is to understand more effectively the power that one has to effect change. Unlike many analyses of power that are often based on the individual, our approach is to exam - ine the organizational power that exists for the practitioner/advocate. We examine that power through two broad lenses: the power of stake - holder relationships and the power of expertise. FIGURE 3-1 is a simple heuristic about power. This pyramid has been widely used in political science and policy fields for years. Power can be seen in the levels of the pyramid, with the nar - rowest (and thus the weakest) type of power at the top of the pyramid. It becomes broader with more effective types of power. Force we all un - derstand. The power to make others do things is obvious, from the actual use of force (includ - ing weapons) through the more common use of force in an organization, which is the power of the organization to enforce rules, standards, and practices. Influence is more nuanced, but its role is also obvious. Does the organization have the capacity to convince others that they should support or acquiesce to the organiza - tion’s decision? There are many reasons an or - ganization may be able to influence a decision.

Possibly the organization has shown the capac - ity to be successful; maybe the organization has demonstrated knowledge or connections to ac - complish the required tasks. Nevertheless, the organization must convince others that its de - cisions are good. Finally, the broadest and most Introduction 45 Here we summarize two broad elements that un - dergird the organization’s power: stakeholders and expertise. We are going to distinguish be - tween internal and external power (power within the organization and beyond) (see FIGURE 3-2). ▸ Stakeholder Power For many in the healthcare arena, stakeholder power is the most obvious political tool. A simple “who do you know, who is on our side” model of developing policy change is obvious.

Too often, however, our approach is to simply add up the influential players on our side and the other side. The stakeholder list becomes a roster of names rather than the nature of power relationships. If it is just a matter of numbers, any policy that is supported by a greater number of individuals or organizations should prevail.

Under those conditions, we would suggest that a national health system that is effective for the poor would be the easiest to pass, but we know that organizations representing low- income groups have less influence than those repre - senting high-income groups. It therefore can - not be just numbers! FIGURE 3-1 The power pyramid Force Inf luence A uthor ity FIGURE 3-2 Focus and locus of organizational power IS Internal Ext ernal LOCUS Exper tise Stak eholder s FOCUS IE ES EE critical part of the pyramid is authority. At the core of a lot of political theory is authority— the acceptance of the organization to decide and the acceptance by others of its decisions without serious question. Expertise is one form of author - ity. It is clear that in some situations the exper - tise of the organization, its professionals, and/ or the policy implementation of that expertise is simply accepted—but that is not always true! One example of how all three elements of the power triangle work is when you are driv - ing your car late at night and you stop at a red light with nobody around. There you sit because a light bulb with a red cover is on. Now, that is power! Do you recognize why you stopped? Did you have to be convinced? (Maybe you think for a second that lights regulate traffic, but it is the middle of the night and there are no cars around.) You do not run the light right away because you first look around to see if there is a police car around. Now all three elements are in play. You stopped at the light in the first place because it turned red, and you stop at red lights. Thus, how do we understand our power in organizations? There are multiple elements— from the regulatory environment, the level of federalism, the growth of the state, and so forth.

46 Chapter 3 A Policy Toolkit for Healthcare Providers and Activists the importance of having stakeholders who are organized and have well-defined structures. For example, veterans is a vague definition for a set of stakeholders, but the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars are two critical orga - nized groups that represent veterans. What if there is no organized set of stake - holders? The first question might be, why is that true? Perhaps the stakeholders in the external environment that your organization deals with are too amorphous to be defined. In James Wil - son’s (1989) terminology, you may represent a majoritarian organization that has no discern - ible set of constituents or stakeholders other than the public. If that is the case, stakeholder power will be more limited for your organization. At the other end of Wilson’s stakeholder organiza - tional model are client agencies whose power is defined heavily through a strong relationship with a single client group. In those cases, the or - ganizations must seek to avoid being captured by that single clientele group (Wilson, 1989). However, we have found that many organi - zations have developed stakeholder groups over time (often for nonpolitical reasons), which gen - erates some level of influence. One of our favor - ite examples comes from outside the healthcare arena—police departments. If one thinks about nat - ural constituents or stakeholders, a police depart - ment’s most obvious stakeholders are those who commit crimes—we are not sure how to build a stakeholder group there! Over time, police depart - ments have developed a host of support organiza - tions, including neighborhood watch groups. The reason they are created is not to influence politi - cal decisions about police departments, but strong neighborhood watch groups (organized across a city) can become a critical secondary stakeholder group for a police department. Who organized those neighborhood watches? Generally, police departments took the lead and the neighborhood watch groups typically support what is being pro - posed by the police department. The example of a children’s hospital is appro - priate here. One might argue that on a day-to-day basis, the constituents of such a hospital are the patients. They are children, but maybe we would Stakeholder analysis is tied to the network of stakeholders and which sets of stakehold - ers are closer to your organization and which are more distant. This close/distant issue is of - ten defined in terms of natural and face-to-face relationships—ideally, which groups deal with your agency or policy arena on a routine, con - stant basis and which groups deal with your organization on a more limited basis. Thus, the classic stakeholder map often has concen - tric circles of groups and organizations that are closer and further away from the organization based on the level of interdependence and orga - nizational closeness (Fottler, Blair, Whitehead, Laus, & Savage, 1989). If you represent a veter - ans’ hospital, for example, members of veter - ans’ organizations, such as the American Legion or Veterans of Foreign Wars, are more central to your organization, but if you are working at a children’s hospital, that organizational tie is irrelevant. Thus, understanding how central other stakeholders are to the organization may be the first part of a stakeholder analysis ( FIGURE 3-3). To understand stakeholder power for an or - ganization, one must define it in terms of orga - nized stakeholders. When working with various healthcare organizations, we often hear stake - holders described in individual terms (e.g., pa - tients or customers), but the key is to recognize FIGURE 3-3 Simplified stakeholder map Secondary stakeholders Less relevant stakeholders Core stakeholders Organization programor Stakeholder Power 47 and has detailed how to expand the relationships with both nurses and other stakeholder groups in the field. Additionally, the National League for Nursing (2013) offers a Public Policy Advo - cacy Toolkit to guide nurses, nursing students, and nursing faculty through the levels of gov - ernmental actions. See BOX 3-1 for a list of pro - fessional nursing membership associations that address policy advocacy. To understand the ad - vocacy role, one must see the importance of the professions’ own expertise, to which we now turn.

▸ Expertise What is expert power in an organization? Some define it in terms of knowledge acquisition and professionalism. Thus, an expert organization would have a large proportion of highly edu - cated professionals, defined by advanced edu - cation, licensure, professional norms and ethical standards, and a lifetime of continuing education.

The healthcare arena has a clear advantage here. include the parents. What about parent groups?

Generally, they have limited interest in being stakeholders of the hospital; in fact, they want their children to get well and leave the hospital.

What about children suffering from a chronic illness or a long-term disease such as cancer?

Most hospitals have developed parent and chil - dren’s groups that get together periodically to support each other (and to provide additional information to the hospital and to other pa - tients and their families about coping with the illness). If the hospital’s outreach department has helped organize the group so that it estab - lishes officers and meeting dates, the group is organized! Is it the same as a veterans’ organi - zation? Clearly not, but it would be wise to in - clude such a group in any efforts to advocate for policy changes (inside and beyond the hospital). If most organizations understand the im - portance of stakeholder relationships in under - standing and utilizing political power, how does the continuing growth of collaborative/shared governance impact that role? At the core of most applications of collaborative models is the need to identify and strengthen all direct and indi - rect partners in the collaborative process. From a personal toolkit perspective, many have em - phasized the importance of creating stakeholder analyses and maps of one’s organizational net - work. If the relationship will be more dynamic and evolving depending on the particular ele - ment of the stakeholders in a collaborative rela - tionship, how much more essential is a continuing in-depth stakeholder analysis? Indeed, in much of the collaborative literature, moving organiza - tions, advocates, and support structures within the policy partnerships (and back out when no longer part of the process) becomes a day-to-day requirement and essential to the ongoing success of the collaborative policy advocacy network. Finally, we suggest that most professional groups have delineated additional ways to de - velop clear stakeholder relationships because they have a stake in what happens within the day-to-day operations of an organization. In nursing, for example, the American Nurses Asso - ciation (2013) has created an advocacy network 48 Chapter 3 A Policy Toolkit for Healthcare Providers and Activists BOX 3-1 Professional Nursing Membership Associations That Address Policy Advocacy American Academy of Nursing (AAN) – www.aannet.org American Association of Nurse Practitioners (AANP) – www.aanp.org American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) – www.aacn.nche.edu American Nurses Association (ANA) – www.nursingworld.org American Organization of Nurse Executives (AONE) – www.aone.org International Council of Nurses (ICN) – www.icn.ch/ National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN) – www.ncsbn.org National League for Nursing (NLN) – www.nln.org Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing – www.nursingsociety.org advanced practice registered nurse (APRN), cer - tified registered nurse anesthetist (CRNA), clin - ical nurse specialist (CNS), or other advanced practice nurse. But it does see the difference be - tween a general practitioner in medicine and a specialist in oncology. What is the difference?

We suggest that the public is convinced (gener - ally through well-defined efforts by the medical establishment) that there are differences in be - havior in the various medical specializations and that some of them have more expertise power be - cause the public perceives them as more expert.

Why is that not as true in nursing? We think part of the explanation is that the nursing profession has been reluctant to publically emphasize the differences among the various areas of nursing professionalism. We suggest that this limits the political capacity of the various specializations to garner separate political support. Buresh and Gordon (2000) proclaim that nurses are not recognized as a profession because they do not educate patients and their families, friends, and communities about nursing work.

If the voice and viability of nursing were com - mensurate with the size and importance of nurs - ing in health care, nurses would receive the three Rs: respect, recognition, and reward. These au - thors expound that if the work of nurses is un - known or misunderstood, then nurses cannot be appreciated or supported and cannot exert appropriate influence in health care. They go on to say that the general public needs to know what nurses do today and why their work is es - sential. The Institute of Medicine’s The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health re- port (2011) proclaims, “The nursing profession must produce leaders throughout the health care system, from the bedside to the boardroom, who can serve as full partners with other health pro - fessionals and be accountable for their own con - tributions to delivering high-quality care while working collaboratively with leaders from other health professions” (p. 221). Those in a position to influence legisla - tion, policy making and funding must know that health care environments The various professions within any existing health - care arena are often complex, and they have special - ized education, training, and licensure at virtually every level of professional delivery of services.

Such professionalized organizations often begin with a noticeable advantage over other organi - zations in which there is little or no profession - alized work force because of their expertise that lends added weight to their advocacy positions. Thus, any definition of organizational exper - tise must begin with the nature of the expertise of the organization and whether it is well devel - oped and professionalized and of the highest ed - ucational standards; however, one must be careful about defining this power simply as a set of ac - quired educational or professional standards. In the end, it is a bit like a traffic light—all the diplo - mas, certificates, and licensures do not necessar - ily mean the expertise is perceived as powerful.

Similar to the number of stakeholders not being as important as the proximity of stakeholders to the decision makers, not all experts carry equal weight when it comes to organizational decisions. What is the key to this expertise? It is the per - ception of others that the expertise is legitimate.

Many healthcare professionals blunder here be - cause they believe a variety of graduate and pro - fessional degrees automatically leads to support of their expertise. To put it in simple terms, many occupations (especially in the healthcare arena) are licensed, certified, and with advanced educa - tion, but they do not have equal expertise power.

Why? Maybe because the public or the broader political and policy environment does not dif - ferentiate the various specializations, or the ex - pertise of the profession is recognized strongly only by the profession itself. The public tends to understand expertise hierarchically. The ex - pertise of physicians carries more weight than other professionals within the healthcare system. The best example today is the widespread public agreement about the need for more nurses.

How does that translate generally? The public does not differentiate well between licensed practical nurse (LPN), registered nurse (RN), diploma, As - sociate Degree (AD), Bachelors of Science in nurs - ing (BSN), Master of Science in nursing (MSN), Expertise 49 environment. When policy is being made inter - nally, such as in a hospital, about how practices are implemented, changed, evolved, or reorga - nized, is the profession you represent at the ta - ble in the discussion? If not, why? We all understand how professions develop expertise over time. They have specialized de - grees, certifications, accreditations, licensures, state associations, and so forth. For the nursing profession there is no higher recognition than a Magnet designation for a healthcare organi - zation. The American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Magnet Recognition Program recog - nizes healthcare organizations for quality pa - tient care, nursing excellence, and innovations in professional nursing practice. The organiza - tion says, “Consumers rely on Magnet designa - tion as the ultimate credential for high quality nursing” (American Nurses Credentialing Cen - ter, 2013, p. 1). It is agreed that it is important for excellent nursing care to be recognized and rewarded, but why don’t all healthcare organizations have Mag - net status? Many hospitals have tried and failed; others elect not to go for Magnet status. What does that tell us about this professional issue?

It is still desirable but not everyone is doing it; therefore, it is controversial. Many healthcare institutions cannot afford the Magnet journey.

For others, they cannot meet the level of nurs - ing education and expertise that is required due to size, location, and so forth. Thus, as we develop the toolkit for expert power, we must ask a critical question: Who be - lieves this expertise of a profession is valued and should be represented in the decision-making process both within and beyond the organization? Let us not lose sight of the increasing reality of expertise within collaborative environments.

One of the key components to most analysis of collaborative networks is the need for evolv - ing expertise in accomplishing the tasks within a policy advocacy network. The literature in public administration is rich with two compo - nents of expertise in such a network: bringing specific expertise to a short-term involvement in a collaborative network, and expanding all rich in nurses promote high levels of health whereas understaffed settings put patients at risk. They need to be aware of the incipient tragedies awaiting patients when nurses are not available to prevent falls, complications, errors in treatment and care or to rescue patients in need. (Buresh & Gordon, 2000, p. 18) An example of how nurses fail to commu - nicate their expertise can be found in the simple example of dress. Professionals are often recog - nized by their attire or uniform. The behavior and dress of nurses today tend to downplay pro - fessionalism by blurring the identity of nurses and making the place of nursing in health care more ambiguous. In healthcare settings, it is of - ten not easy for patients or families to pick out who is a nurse and who is not. Buresh & Gor - don (2000) proclaim that without a protocol to provide clarity, it is up to individual nurses to convey who they are through their appearance, behavior, and language. It has become a com - mon practice for nurses in hospital settings to not tell or show their last name on name tags.

Physicians would certainly not do this. When members of the largest healthcare profession (nurses) opt out of the standard professional greeting, they risk communicating that they do not regard themselves as professionals (Buresh & Gordon, 2000). Can you imagine hospitals saying today, as they did 20 to 30 years ago, that they cannot af - ford to staff with registered or BSN-prepared nurses? What has pushed that bar? The Institute of Medicine’s report on the future of nursing recommends that we “increase the propor - tion of nurses with a baccalaureate degree to 80 percent and double the number of nurses with a doctorate by 2020” (Institute of Medi - cine, 2013, p.1). Thus, exerting expert power in an organi - zational setting must also include addressing some important issues, not the least of which is the belief that the expertise of the particular set of professionals has a valid place in the policy 50 Chapter 3 A Policy Toolkit for Healthcare Providers and Activists build a stronger perception of the importance of our expertise with those who work with our programs and agencies? 4. Looking at Figure 3-1, how do organizations overutilize the force component in organizational power?

What kinds of evidence would you expect to see in an organization that is not using influence or authority well? 5. Given the need for greater collabora - tion in the health policy arena, how does improving your stakeholder relationships with other organizations and interests become even more important? References Allen, D., Calkin, J., & Peterson, M. (1988). Making shared governance work: A conceptual model. Journal of Nursing Administration, 18 (1), 37–43. American Nurses Association. (2013). Advocacy—becoming more effective. Retrieved from http://www.nursingworld. org/MainMenuCategories/Policy-Advocacy/Advocacy ResourcesTools American Nurses Credentialing Center. (2013). ANCC Magnet Recognition Program. Retrieved from http://www.nursecredentialing.org/Magnet.aspx Anthony, M., (2004). Shared governance models: The theory, practice, and evidence. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing 9 (1), manuscript 4. Buresh, B., & Gordon, S. (2000). From silence to voice: What nurses know and must communicate to the public. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Nurses Association. Fottler, M. D., Blair, J. D., Whitehead, C. J., Laus, M. D., & Savage, G. T. (1989). Assessing key stakeholders: Who matters to hospitals and why? Hospitals and Health Services Administration, 34 (4), 525–546. Institute of Medicine. (2011). The future of nursing: leading change, advancing health. National Academies Press, Washington, DC. Institute of Medicine. (2013). The future of nursing: leading change, advancing health. Retrieved from http://www .thefutureofnursing.org/recommendations National League for Nursing. (2013). Faculty programs and resources: Public policy advocacy toolkit. Retrieved from http://www.nln.org/facultyprograms/publicpolicytoolkit /publicpolicytoolkit.htm Wilson, J. Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: What government agencies do and why they do it. New York, NY: Basic Books. participants’ capacity to expand their own ex - pertise in a shared fashion. Put another way, an effective policy advocacy network needs to share knowledge more effectively, not just add experts to the policy environment.

▸ Conclusion Politics and policy require an understanding of how to build support and adapt to change. If we are to be effective advocates, we must be respon - sive to broader societal needs. Building support is not done simply by presenting the facts. This toolkit is designed to help readers know what it takes in a political environment to build a case and adapt when necessary. A huge mistake in advocacy is to simply believe that the facts are on our side, and if we just continue to list the facts, everyone will believe! In reality, values and political issues are at the core of success - ful change. Our tasks as political advocates for change are as follows:

■ Believe we can convince others to adapt. ■ Adapt ourselves to handle broader political value issues. ■ Learn to mobilize our expert power as one of the largest groups of stakeholders in the healthcare field. Discussion Questions 1. As you read through this chapter, describe the political environment of your own organization, both at the largest level and at a division or office level. 2. Internal and external stakeholders are important to any organization or policy. Describe your view about reliance more on internal stakeholders than on external stakeholders, and vice versa. Why do you think there are differences? 3. Expertise power is often difficult to define in detail, but how do we 51 References stakeholders and type of expertise involved.

The questions following each case study are helpful for group discussion and individual analysis. This chapter concludes with one ad - ditional case study that has not had any po - litical result to date, and readers are asked to analyze that case in terms of how one might build the necessary political stakeholder and expert power.

External Expert Power The first two cases are doubtless well known to readers, but what may not be well known is the history of policy development in these areas. As you examine these two case studies, remember that their purpose is to show the role of exper - tise in affecting policy. ▸ Toolkit Case Studies The case studies included at the end of this toolkit chapter are designed to aid the reader in understanding the politics of organizational power. They are divided based on four catego - ries: external stakeholder, internal stakeholder, external expertise, and internal expertise. Each of these real-life case studies illustrates how health professionals have applied the tools as highlighted within this chapter. The case study authors have included references when appli - cable. To guide your comprehension and appli - cation of the toolkit, the authors have included several thought-provoking questions at the end of each case study. Readers are encouraged to critically analyze the political methods and power used in each case study, exploring the CASE STUDY External Stakeholder Power:

Margaret Sanger as Nurse and Public Health Advocate Ellen Chesler “No gods, no masters,” the rallying cry of the Industrial Workers of the World, was her personal and political manifesto. Emma Goldman, Bill Haywood, Mabel Dodge, and John Reed were among her earliest mentors and comrades. Allied with labor organizers and bohemians, Margaret Sanger first emerged on the American scene in those halcyon days at the turn of the 20th century when the country seemed wide open with possibility, before world war, revolution, and repression provided a more sober reality. She organized pickets, protests, and pageants in the hope of achieving wholesale economic and social justice. What began as a callow faith in revolution quickly gave way to a more concrete agenda for reform. Working as a visiting nurse on New York City’s Lower East Side, she watched a young patient die from the complications of a then-common illegal abortion, and vowed to abandon palliative work and devote herself to a single-minded pursuit of reproductive autonomy for women. Sanger proudly claimed personal freedom for women. She also insisted that the price women pay for equality should not be at the sacrifice of personal fulfillment. Following in the footsteps of a generation of suffragists and social welfare activists who had forgone marriage to gain professional stature and public influence, she became the standard bearer of a less ascetic breed, intent on balancing work and family obligations. The hardest challenge in writing this history for modern audiences, for whom these claims have become routine, is to explain how absolutely destabilizing they seemed in Sanger’s time.

Even with so much lingering animus toward women’s rights today, it is hard to remember that reproduction was once considered a woman’s principal purpose and motherhood was her primary role—women were assumed to have no need for identities or rights independent of those they enjoyed by virtue of their relationships to men. This principle was central to the long- enduring opposition women have faced in seeking rights to work, to inheritance and property, to suffrage, and especially to control of their own bodies. 52 Chapter 3 A Policy Toolkit for Healthcare Providers and Activists contraceptive materials and use the federal mail for transport. The ruling effectively realized years of failed efforts to achieve legislative reform in the U.S. Congress, although it did formally override prohibitions that remained in several states until the historic ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut with its claim of a constitutional doctrine of privacy, later extended so controversially to abortion in Roe v. Wade .

With hard work and determination, she was able to mobilize men of influence in business, labor, academia, and the emerging professions.

No less critical to her success was her decision to invest in the collective potential of women, many of whom had been oriented to activism by the suffrage movement and were eager for a new cause after finally winning the vote in 1920. She also lobbied the churches, convincing the clerical establishments of the progressive Protestant and Jewish denominations of the virtue of liberating sexuality and reproduction from the shroud of myth and mystery to which traditional faiths had long consigned them. She even won a concession from the hierarchy of the American Catholic Church, which overruled the Vatican and endorsed natural family planning, or the so-called rhythm method, as a way of countering the secular birth control movement and reasserting religious authority over values and behavior. With an uncanny feel for the power of well-communicated ideas in a democracy, Sanger moved beyond women’s rights to put forth powerful public health and social welfare claims for birth control. She proved herself a savvy public relations strategist and an adept grassroots organizer. Through the 1920s and 1930s she wrote best-selling books, published a widely read journal, and crisscrossed the country and circled the globe to give lectures and hold conferences that attracted great interest and drove even more publicity. She built a thriving voluntary movement to conduct national- and state-level legislative lobbying and advocacy and to work in communities on the ground, sustaining affiliate organizations that organized and operated pioneering women’s health clinics. Offering a range of medical and mental health services in reasonably sympathetic environments, many of these facilities became laboratories for her idealism. Yet the birth control movement stalled during the long years of the Great Depression (1929-1939) Sanger needed broader arguments. By practicing birth control, women would not just serve themselves, she countered. They would also lower birthrates, alter the balance of supply and demand for labor, alleviate poverty, and thereby achieve the aspirations of workers without the social upheaval of class warfare. It would not be the dictates of Karl Marx, but the refusal of women to bear children indiscriminately, that would alter the course of history, a proposition ever resonant today as state socialism becomes an artifact of history, while family planning, although still contested, endures with palpable consequences worldwide. In 1917, Sanger went to jail for distributing contraceptive pessaries to immigrant women from a makeshift clinic in a tenement storefront in the Brownsville section of Brooklyn. Sanger’s contribution was to demand services for the poor that were available to the middle class. Her heresy, if you will, was in bringing the issue of sexual and reproductive freedom out into the open and claiming it as a woman’s right. She staged her arrest deliberately to challenge New York’s already anachronistic obscenity laws—the legacy of the notorious Anthony Comstock, whose evangelical fervor had captured Victorian politics in a manner eerily reminiscent of our time—and it led to the adoption, by the federal government and the states, of broad criminal sanctions on sexual speech and commerce, including all materials related to contraception and abortion. Direct action tactics served Sanger well, but legal appeal of her conviction also established a medical exception to New York’s Comstock Law.

Doctors—although not nurses, as she originally intended—were granted the right to prescribe contraception for health purposes; under that constraint she built the modern family planning movement with independent, freestanding facilities as the model for distribution of services, a developme