Nathanson Constance A
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, USA.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2003 Apr-Jun;28(2-3):443-71. doi: 10.1215/03616878-28-2-3-443.
The social movement has become institutionalized as a form of political action. The aim of this article is to evaluate the possibilities presented by this form as a strategy to bring about universal health insurance in the United States. I draw on the work of social movement theorists, on the substantial body of empirical research on health-related social movements, and on relevant comparative work from Canada to develop a template for this evaluation. Using that template I compare the failed campaign for President Bill Clinton's health insurance plan with a recent, more successful campaign in the state of New York. I conclude that the keys to success are, first, a broad-based coalition that combines an ideologically and/or grievance-motivated grass roots with financially and politically well-endowed mainstream organizations; second, a "master frame" that resonates with the American people; and, third, a political window of opportunity. The prospects for such a conjunction are not hopeless, but they are not high.
这场社会运动已成为一种政治行动形式并被制度化。本文旨在评估这种形式作为在美国实现全民医疗保险的一种策略所带来的可能性。我借鉴了社会运动理论家的著作、关于与健康相关的社会运动的大量实证研究成果，以及来自加拿大的相关比较研究，来制定这一评估模板。利用该模板，我将比尔·克林顿总统的医疗保险计划竞选失败案例与纽约州近期一次较为成功的竞选进行了比较。我得出的结论是，成功的关键首先是一个基础广泛的联盟，它将出于意识形态和/或不满情绪的基层力量与资金雄厚、政治影响力大的主流组织结合起来；其次是一个能引起美国民众共鸣的“主框架”；第三是一个政治机遇之窗。这种情况同时出现的前景并非毫无希望，但可能性也不高。
