ABSTRACT
Wisdom favors public policies characterized by simple design and clear cause-eff ect relationships. Such straightforwardness has often been missing from U.S. health reform eff orts due to competing policy goals, a political environment populated with infl uential interests, and the tendency for law making to become ensnared in valueladen ideological debates. Th e promise of comparative analysis lies in the pragmatic opportunity to compile examples of policy interventions elsewhere whose intellectual rationale and operational history are well documented and whose positive outcomes justify serious scrutiny. Herein lies a wellspring for ongoing innovation in health policy development, if only Americans would be suffi ciently curious and open-minded. When it comes to national problem solving, there is nothing ignoble about “systematically pinching ideas,” especially if it off ers a prudent way to combine art and science, invention and selection, in public policy design (Schneider and Ingram 1988).
