Parting At The Crossroad Summary

Canada and the United States are countries that are known to share some similar attributes, but the question people often ask is why they each possess a different path to health reforms. A universal healthcare system funded by the government in Canada, and a dual-tried system of medicare and medicaid targeted at the poor and elderly in the United States. This essay, will talk about key points from the article “Parting at the crossroad”, why I think the author Maioni is convincing in making her case, and also some Important “take home” messages that I came across from reading and analyzing the article.

First, I will start by identifying some of the key points from this article.The author critically analyzed the policy trends in both countries,

This article also identifies how the rules of the Canadian Parliamentary government, created an opportunity for the emergence of this social democratic third party that helped to shape the Universal healthcare in Canada, but failed to do so in the United States (Maioni 1997, Pg.413). The reason for the status quo in the U.S, it the inability for a third party to make political decisions due to the influence of the two major parties which is different in the Canadian Institution. (Maioni 1997) adds that a third party in Canada may not be able to form a government, but is able to influence federal policymaking. The federal government in the Canadian intuition is also known to be decentralized, that is, they are not involved in

Through historical evidence and analysis, Maioni has been able to present a reason as to why Canada and the U.S parted in their approach towards health reforms. She implies that the divergence is a result of the evolution of a social democratic third party in Canada which was able to influence health reforms and gave rise to the universal healthcare system. The author carefully analyzed these two countries political system even though they both have the same political cultures unlike other European countries. The author explained how their different political institutional attributes were able to influence their policy output. The Canadian political system, encourages a democratic third party which has led to the development of the government financed healthcare system. Whereas the U.S political system made healthcare reformers to restructure their idea to appeal to a wide Coalition within the democratic party. This led to their parting in terms of health insurance. Also, the article does not contradict with my previous knowledge of Canadian and American politics, this makes it easier for me to believe or agree with the message Maoini is trying to