Shelton confirms the power of talk in the specific case of the 1994 debate on comprehensive health care reform and beyond. He provides a context rich with detail concerning health care and health care reform in America and a social scientific examination of specific discourse factors that includes narratives, naming, and medical metaphors.
Shelton's assessment of the debate reveals that opposition discourse was much more directly impacted and broader in scope. This is followed by a rhetorical analysis that extends the genre of crisis rhetoric. Shelton's rhetorical analysis reveals that the virtual crisis of big government both subsumed and overwhelmed the actual health care crisis. Such an assessmentincluding an ethical analysis of the 1994 floor debate and detailed consideration of the social existence of hatred for governmentproduces a host of research and scholarly implications. A thoughtful analysis that will be of value to scholars and researchers in political communication and public policy.
MICHAEL W. SHELTON is Lecturer and Assistant Coordinator of Public Speaking at University of Kentucky. He maintains an active scholarly career, having published more than fifty publications, including over three dozen articles and four books and workbooks.
Introduction
The Context
The United States Health Care System
The History of Health Care Reform
Health Care Reform in the 1990s
The Text
Senate Battleground
Congressional Record
Textual Features
The Discourse
Discourse Patterns
The Deliberation
The Triumph of the Big Government Argument
The Implications
An Ethical Assessment
Scholarly Horizons
Contemporary Currents
Bibliography
Index